Having found no basis for imposition of a de minimus rule in employment statutes and regulations, the California Supreme Court turned to general jurisprudence. There, the maxim at issue – that the law will not concern itself with trifles – appears in California Civil Code section 3533. But the Court declined to address whether the de minimus concept “may ever apply to wage and hour claims given the wide range of scenarios in which this issue arises.”

In rejecting the federal doctrine, the Supreme Court repeatedly referred to California statutes requiring employees to be compensated for “all time.” The Court then discussed whether some version of the de minimis doctrine still applied in California pursuant to its existence as a general tenet of California law, as evidenced by California case law and California Civil Code section 3533, providing “The law disregards trifles.” On this issue, the Supreme Court held that the doctrine would not apply under the facts given to it by the Ninth Circuit.