Judge: Colin Leis, Case: 20STCV20832, Date: 2025-02-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV20832    Hearing Date: February 5, 2025    Dept: 74

Garcia v. Madera Kitchen et al.

Defendant Milton Sznaider’s Demurrer

BACKGROUND 

This motion arises from an employment action.

Plaintiff Blas Garcia (Plaintiff) filed an initial complaint against defendants Mardera Kitchen and Milton Sznaider (Sznaider).

Default was granted against Milton Sznaider and then set aside on August 17, 2023.

Plaintiff filed the Second Amended Complaint (SAC) against defendants Milton Sznaider; Loyal Pennings; and Paseo De Cahuenga, LLC.  Plaintiff alleges nine causes of action: (1) Unpaid wages; (2) Unpaid Overtimes Wages; (3) Failure to Provide Meal Periods; (4) Failure to Provide Rest Periods; (5) Failure to Keep and Provide Accurate Itemized Wage Statements; (6) Waiting Time Penalties; (7) Unfair Business Practices; (8) Failure to Produce Personnel and Payroll Records; and (9) Penalties Pursuant to the California Private Attorneys General Act.

DISCUSSION

            Sznaider demurs to the First, Second and Ninth causes of action on the grounds that Plaintiff fails to make sufficient factual allegations of Sznaider’s liability.  Violations of the Labor Code depend on the employer-employee relationship.  (Martinez v. Combs (2010) 49 Cal.4th 35, 49.) A heightened pleading standard does not apply to pleading employer status.  Plaintiff pleads that each Defendant is an alter-ego of the other.  (FAC ¶¶ 9, 12.)  Additionally, Plaintiff pleads that each Defendant acted as an employer or joint employer of Plaintiff.  (FAC ¶ 10.)  Plaintiff pleads specifically that he performed tasks under the supervision and control of Sznaider.  (FAC ¶ 17.)  Plaintiff has alleged sufficient facts of Sznaider’s liability.

            Sznaider also demurs to the ninth cause of action by challenging that proper notice was not given to the employer.  (Labor Code § 2699.3.)  Sznaider contends that the SAC fails to state which Defendant received the PAGA notice.  The Labor Code section 2699.3 requires that an aggrieved employee must give written notice to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) and the employer of the alleged violations and the facts and theories that support the alleged violation.  Plaintiff pleads in the FAC that he has complied with the procedural requirements under Labor Code section 2699 et seq.  (FAC ¶¶ 86, 88.) Whether Plaintiff’s service was insufficient is a factual question not suited for demurrer. 

CONCLUSION                                                                                                            

            The Court overrules Defendant’s Demurrer.

            Defendant shall file and serve his answer within 10 days.

            Defendant to give notice.