Portland small claims court awards café worker $120 despite zero-hours payroll entry

A small claims court in Portland has ordered Copper Finch Café LLC to pay Elena Mercer $120 for an unpaid closing shift, finding that she worked six hours despite a payroll entry recording none. The award grants her full wage claim; she sought no penalties, and none were awarded.

The dispute turned on what happened between 4 p.m. and 10 p.m. on April 10, 2026. Both sides agreed that the café scheduled Mercer at $20 an hour and that she accepted. They disagreed over whether she actually worked.

The court found it more likely than not that Mercer completed the shift. Her consistent, direct account was decisive when considered alongside the absence of firsthand evidence contradicting her.

The payroll sheet clearly established what the café recorded, but not necessarily what happened. The café representative who entered zero hours believed Mercer had left, yet could not personally confirm that she had. The sheet contained neither a clock-out time nor employee confirmation.

Mercer still bore the burden of proving her claim. The court acknowledged that she had no independent witness or separate time record, and that the scheduling message alone could not establish attendance. Those limitations, however, did not erase her specific account of working the full shift.

The café's argument that unrecorded hours necessarily meant no work assumed the accuracy of the disputed entry. Once the court found that Mercer worked, the agreed hours and rate established $120 in earnings. The payroll showed no wages for the date, and the café identified no payment.

Mercer maintained that she worked the entire closing shift. She relied on her account, the assignment message and her acceptance, while acknowledging that the message proved only that she was expected to attend.

Copper Finch argued that all recorded hours had been paid and that Mercer lacked concrete proof of attendance. It stressed that being scheduled was not the same as working and that the burden rested with her, not the café.

Both sides relied on the need for a clear accounting of wages. Their disagreement was whether the zero-hours entry reliably accounted for the work itself.

The café's position was that Mercer had left before the shift and therefore earned nothing that evening. Its representative's account of her departure, however, was relayed through submissions rather than firsthand evidence of absence.

The judgment resolves only the wage claim for April 10. It does not treat either a scheduled shift or a worker's account as automatically conclusive; the outcome rests on the court's assessment of this account and the limited attendance value of this payroll entry.