Judge: Carolyn M. Caietti, Case: 37-2021-00003107-CU-OE-CTL, Date: 2024-04-12 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - April 11, 2024

04/12/2024  10:30:00 AM  C-70 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Carolyn Caietti

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Other employment Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2021-00003107-CU-OE-CTL HOLGUIN VS HAWTHORNE MACHINERY CO [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Prior to the hearing on this motion, Plaintiff is ordered to: (i) provide a proposed amended order including the definition of the PAGA class, PAGA period and the service award payment to Plaintiff and modifying section 3 as discussed herein; (ii) revise the notice to the class as discussed herein and (ii) bring a copies of that order and notice to the hearing.

Plaintiff Edmundo Holguin's Motion to Approve Private Attorneys General Act Settlement and Dismiss PAGA Claims with Prejudice is GRANTED.

Labor Code section 2699(l)(2) requires courts to 'review and approve' PAGA settlements. (See also, Moniz v. Adecco USA, Inc. (2021) 72 Cal.App.5th 56.) Here, the settlement agreement was provided to the LWDA on November 16, 2023. (Lab. Code, § 2699(l)(2); ROA 46 - Declaration of Timothy Del Castillo, at ¶ 17.) LWDA has not responded.

The PAGA settlement of $287,963 is 'fair, reasonable, and adequate in view of PAGA's purposes to remediate present labor law violations, deter future ones, and to maximize enforcement of state labor laws.' (Moniz, supra, 72 Cal.App.5th at p. 77.) The PAGA members consist of all hourly, nonexempt employees of Defendant who worked in California any time during the PAGA Period. The PAGA Period is from August 21, 2019 to the date the Court approves the settlement. There are approximately 383 employees who worked 20,003 pay periods. The net distribution of the penalties calculates to $156,892.35 of the gross settlement with $112,976.25 awarded to the LWDA and $37,658.75 awarded to the Aggrieved Employees. This is consistent with Labor Code section 2699(i).

The Court evaluated the strength of the plaintiff's case, risk, complexity, likely duration of further litigation, the settlement amount, any indications of fraud, collusion or unfairness, and whether the plaintiffs adequately represented the state and public's interests.

Here, the parties engaged in substantial informal and formal discovery and exchange of documents.

Defendant produced relevant wage and hour policies, Plaintiff's time records, pay records and personnel files as well as timekeeping and pay data on other PAGA members. This information allowed Plaintiff to assess liability and damages and create a damages model with the help of a damages expert. (Del Castillo Decl., at ¶¶ 19-20 .) Counsel has significant experience litigating wage and hour class and PAGA actions.

The settlement is a good result and the product of arms-length negotiations between experienced Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3058175  45 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  HOLGUIN VS HAWTHORNE MACHINERY CO [IMAGED]  37-2021-00003107-CU-OE-CTL counsel and was reached after a mediation session with an experienced wage and hour mediator, a second all-day mediation session with (ret.) Hon. William McCurine, Jr., and two all-day mediation sessions before another experienced wage and hour mediator. (ROA 47 – Declaration of Kyle Nordrehaug, at ¶¶ 8-9.) The LWDA, nor any other individual or aggrieved employee has objected to the settlement. Taken as a whole, Plaintiff adequately represented the state and public's interests.

The attorney fees sought are reasonable and based on 1/3 of the gross settlement. (Lab. Code, § 2699(g)(1); Del Castillo Decl.) The Plaintiff's service award of $5,000, litigation costs of $23,742.65 and service administration costs of $6,350 to ILYM to administer the settlement are reasonable.

However, the Court would like the Notice to the class to be revised at page 1:24-26 to reflect all items, including the specific amounts, deducted from the gross settlement amount including the administrator's costs and Plaintiff's service payment.

For these reasons, the Court approves the PAGA settlement and GRANTS the motion.

The Court will review the proposed amended order and amended notice at the hearing. That order will be the Court's final ruling on the motion.

Plaintiff is ordered to serve notice of the Court's conformed order on all parties.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3058175  45