Plaintiff Robinson had been working for SkyCar from January 2001 to August 2, 2004 when he was terminated form filing a claim against SkyCar for unpaid wages (minimum and overtime). Plaintiff after learning about the details of the minimum wage law (i.e. that he was an employee and tips were not counted as part of the minimum wage) filed a claim with the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement and later this claim with the Superior Court. Plaintiff estimates from records kept for the month of March that he was underpaid on the average of 15 dollars a day. Plaintiff�s discovery demands to obtain detailed records to more accurately determine the total amount of the underpayment were ignored. A Motion to Compel has been filed on this demand. Plaintiff was paid in cash as a percentage of the fares less expenses for gas.

Plaintiff�s suit includes both SkyCar Inc., and Laura Nelson as defendants. Discovery demands were made upon SkyCar Inc., and to date there has been no response. Although Laura Nelson answered the complaint SkyCar Inc. has not. At the time that Laura Nelson was served with the original complaint and subpoena, Laura Nelson was the sole operating manager of SkyCar Inc. Notices of motions to compel and request for entry of default sent to SkyCar Inc., at 7135 W. Manchester were returned unopened with writing on the outside stating "return to sender" and that the company no longer exists. Inquires made by phone and a visit to the 7135 W. Manchester revealed that SkyCar is still in business and at the same location. (see Exhibit A showing business location after the return of the notice.) Also an examination of the writing on the return envelopes and the writing on the envelope of Defendant Laura Nelson answer to the complaint and subpoena is the same (see Exhibit B) An inquiry with postal officials revealed that the writing on the outside of the envelopes was not that of a postal employee.

Plaintiff applied for unemployment after being terminated by Laura Nelson. Although SkyCar had paid no employment taxes to the state, the EDD�s administrative judge determined based on evidence and testimony from Plaintiff that an employee/ employer relationship existed between Plaintiff and SkyCar, and that Plaintiff was eligible for unemployment benefits. (see exhibit C for the administrative judge�s determination) (Note: although it is acknowledged that this determination is not binding upon the Superior Court, it is offered as persuasive evidence for the purpose of "proving up" damages for the default judgement claim).

Plaintiff believes that SkyCar Inc., was operating as a corporation for the years 2001, 2002, and 2003. It is believed that after 2003, SkyCar was operated as the alter ego of Defendant Laura Nelson and that she is now in fact doing business as SkyCar. Because of this it is believed that SkyCar should be held liable for the years 2001, 2002, and 2003 for under payment of wages of which the default judgement should apply and that the case should to forward as to Laura Nelson for under payment of wages for the year of 2004.

Based on the above facts, Plaintiff believes that a default judgement should be rendered for Plaintiff against SkyCar Inc., for the maximum prayed for in the complaint of $10, 999. This is based upon an estimate of underpayment of $15/ day by 250 days/year by 3 years equaling $11,250 (See exhibit D). Plaintiff believes that this amount should be accepted for the reason that Defendant SkyCar failed to answer the complaint and failed to respond to discovery requests that would revealed more accurate figures.

All of the above statement were made on Plaintiff�s information and belief. And I, Plaintiff Robinson, declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.