Judge Cherol J. Nellon, Case Number: 19STCV41475, Date: 2025-02-06 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 19STCV41475, Date: 2025-02-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV41475 Hearing Date: February 6, 2025 Dept: 14

Case Background

Plaintiffs Rogelio Gonzalez (“Rogelio”) and Juanita Gonzalez (“Juanita”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”) allege that Plaintiff Rogelio’s exposure to Defendants’ products, during the course of his career as a machine helper for A & S Glass Fabrics Co. Inc., caused serious injuries to his internal organs, including cirrhosis of the liver.

On November 19, 2019, Plaintiffs Rogelio Gonzalez (“Rogelio”) and Juanita Gonzalez (“Juanita”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed their complaint against Defendants A.G. Layne, Inc. (“Layne”); Brenntag Pacific, Inc. (“Brenntag”); County Chemical; Dow Silicones Corporation (“Dow Silicones”); Eastman Chemical Company, Inc. (“Eastman”); Smarkchem Industries, Inc. (“Smarkchem”); and Univar Solutions USA, Inc. (“Univar”).

On January 9, 2020, Defendant Smarkchem filed its Cross-Complaint for (1) Equitable Indemnity; (2) Contribution; and (3) Declaratory Relief against Cross-Defendant ROES 1-100.

On November 12, 2021, Lien Claimant Preferred Employers Insurance Company filed a notice of lien. At this time, trial was set for June 20, 2022.

On November 23, 2021, Plaintiffs filed a notice to the employer in this matter, Fabri Cote, of third party action pursuant to Labor Code, section 3853.

On May 25, 2022, Plaintiff filed a series of Doe Amendments, substituting Defendants Ashland LLC (“Ashland”); Calumet Specialty Products Partners, LP (“Calumet”); Chemsol, LLC (“Chem Sol”); Citgo Petroleum Corporation (“Citgo”); The Plaza Group, Inc. (“Plaza”); Chemical Specialists and Development, LLC (“CSD”); Greenchem Industries, LLC (“Greenchem”); Kern Oil and Refining Company (“Kern”); Methanex Methanol Company (“Methanex”); Sasol Chemicals (USA) LLC (“Sasol”); Shell Chemical, LP (“Shell”); SolvChem, Inc. (“SolvChem”); The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow Chemical”); Totalenergies Marketing USA, Inc. dba Total Specialties USA, Inc. (“Totalenergies”); Transchem, Inc. (“Transchem”); and Valero Marketing and Supply Company (“Valero”) in lieu of DOES 1, 3-10, and 12-18, respectively.

On October 3, 2022, Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Complaint (“FAC”).

On September 5, 2023, Plaintiff Rogelio Gonzalez (Decedent) passed away, leaving Juanita Gonzalez as the only remaining Plaintiff.

November 12, 2024, Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement.

On December 19, 2024, Plaintiff filed this motion to strike and expunge the lien of The Rawlings Company, LLC.

On January 21, 2025, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to expunge the lien belonging to Preferred Employers Insurance Company.

Instant Pleading

Plaintiff moves to expunge a lien claimed by The Rawlings Company, LLC.

Decision

Plaintiff’s motion to expunge lien is DENIED.

Discussion

Plaintiff moves to expunge the lien claimed by The Rawlings Company, LLC (Rawlings). Plaintiff alleges that Rawlings responded to his notice of personal injury claim with a letter stating it would be asserting all available rights of recovery. (Brust Decl., ¶5.) However, Rawlings never followed up, never filed a notice of lien, and never notified Plaintiff of the value of any lien. (Id.)

Legal Standard

“With some exceptions not applicable here, when a worker is entitled to workers’ compensation benefits for an injury, those benefits constitute the worker’s exclusive remedy against his or her employer for injuries sustained in the course of employment. (Lab. Code, section 3602, subd. (a).) The worker, however, may recover a judgment from a negligent third party who caused the injury. (Lab. Code, section 3852.) Likewise, in appropriate circumstances, the employer is entitled to recover from the negligent third party the amount of compensation the employer has paid to the injured worker. (Lab. Code, section 3852; Quinn v. State of California (1975) 15 Cal.3d 162, 167, 124.) The employer may sue the third party directly or may claim a portion of any judgment recovered by the injured employee. (Id.)

“When an employer claims reimbursement rights because it has paid benefits to an injured worker, it may proceed against a third party tortfeasor by bringing a direct action, by intervening in an action brought by the employee or by filing a lien in an action brought by the employee.” (Aetna, supra, 20 Cal.App.4th at p. 1506.) However, the filing of a lien is insufficient protection to an employer’s claim of reimbursement when allegations of employer negligence are made under Witt v. Jackson (1961) 57 Cal.2d 57. (American, supra, 48 Cal.App.4^th at p. 1906.) Once a defense under Witt v. Jackson is asserted, “it becomes imperative that the employer be given notice of such a defense…in a timely manner so as to afford him…a reasonable opportunity to be heard.” (Aetna, supra, 20 Cal.App.4^th at p.1508.)

An employer or employee who sues a third party must notify the other forthwith by personal service or certified mail and file proof of service in the action. (Lab. Code, section 3853.) “The other may, at any time before trial on the facts, join as party plaintiff or shall consolidate his action, if brought independently.” (Id.) Notice must be formal and cannot be left to informal communication between counsel. (Carden v. Otto (1974) 37 Cal.App.3d 887, 897.)

Discussion

Here, Rawlings never filed a notice of lien or made any other attempt to claim part of the settlement in this case. There is no lien to expunge. Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion to strike and expunge a lien claim made by the Rawlings Company, LLC is DENIED.

Conclusion

Plaintiff’s motion to expunge lien is DENIED.