Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: BC677388, Date: 2024-02-01 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC677388    Hearing Date: February 1, 2024    Dept: 14

Ortega v. Carson Wild Wings

Case Background

Plaintiff alleges that Defendants repeatedly forced her to work through her breaks or work off the clock, then fired her when she complained.

            On September 26, 2017, Plaintiff filed her Complaint for (1) Violation Of The Whistle-Blowing Law; (2) Retaliation For Engaging In A Protected Activity; (3) Wrongful Termination In Violation Of Public Policy; (4) Intentional Infliction Of Emotional Distress (“IIED”); (5) Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress (“NIED”); and (6) Failure To Produce Personnel File against Defendants Carson Wild Wings, LLC (hereinafter “CWW”); Edward Barnett II (hereinafter “Barnett”); Karim Webb (hereinafter “Webb”); and DOES 1-25.

On November 28, 2017, Defendants CWW, Barnett, and Webb filed their joint Answer.

            On December 2, 2019, this court granted summary adjudication in favor of Plaintiff on the sixth cause of action.

On January 27, 2020, the case was called for trial.

On February 7, 2020, this court granted a directed verdict in favor of Defendants Barnett and Webb on the issue of whether they were joint employers of Plaintiff.

On February 11, 2020, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant CWW on all causes of action. On February 13, 2020, the jury returned a verdict awarding punitive damages against Defendant CWW.

            On September 29, 2020, the court entered judgment against Defendant CWW in the amount of $301,500.00. On October 27, 2020, the parties stipulated to the entry of a corrected judgment against Defendant CWW in the same amount. The court entered that corrected judgment the same day. Plaintiff served notice of entry of judgment on November 3, 2020. On December 30, 2020, Defendant CWW filed a notice of appeal from that judgment.

            On January 5, 2021, this court awarded plaintiff $291,948.00 in attorney’s fees against Defendant CWW. On January 6, 2021, Defendant CWW filed a notice of appeal from that award.

            On February 3, 2021, this court granted motions (1) taxing the memorandum of costs filed by Defendants Barnett and Webb in its entirety, and (2) taxing the memorandum of costs filed by Plaintiff in the amount of $688.40. No appeal was taken from that ruling.

            On October 19, 2023, the Court of Appeal issued its remittitur affirming the award of summary judgment on the sixth cause of action but reversing the judgment on the remaining causes of action. The damages and fee awards were likewise reversed.

Instant Motion

Defendant CWW now moves this court for an order amending the judgment to reflect the ruling of the Court of Appeal.

Decision

            The motion is GRANTED, in part. The court will not sign the proposed amended judgment in its current form. Defendant CWW should submit a new proposed judgment within 10 days of the court’s ruling on the outstanding issues of fees and costs.

Discussion

            Plaintiff agrees that the judgment needs to be amended to reflect the decision made by the Court of Appeal. Her objection is that Defendant CWW’s proposed judgment includes a paragraph making various findings about who is a prevailing party, and what costs may be recovered. The objection is a valid one. This court will decide the amount and apportionment of fees and costs when it rules on the motions for fees and costs currently set on February 22, 2024. The court does not wish to foreclose any argument by any party on those motions at this time.

            There is no point in issuing an amended judgment now that may need to be altered again in a few weeks if the numbers shift even slightly. In these circumstances it is better to get all the numbers settled first, and then include them in one final judgment.