Judge: Elaine Lu, Case: 24STCV05428, Date: 2024-06-28 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24STCV05428 Hearing Date: June 28, 2024 Dept: 9
On March 21, 2024,
the Court notified all parties in this action via Case Anywhere that effective
April 2, 2024, Judge Elaine Lu would be temporarily assigned to Department 9 at
312 N. Spring Street, Los Angeles, California 90012, Spring Street Courthouse.
The Court hereby
notifies all parties again that Judge Elaine Lu has been temporarily assigned
to Department 9 and will preside over all matters set for hearing on June 28,
2024, including the Initial Status Conference in this action. All parties are invited to respond to this
notice either (a) by indicating on Case Anywhere acceptance of Judge Elaine Lu
to preside over the upcoming matters set for hearing on June 28, 2024, or (b)
by filing a peremptory challenge under Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6
(if one is still available to that party) prior to the commencement of the
hearings set for that date.
In addition, all
parties should note that a tentative ruling for the CMO is hereby distributed
via Case Anywhere. If all parties submit
on the tentative ruling prior to the June 28, 2024 ISC, the CMO will be
adopted, and the parties need not appear for the Initial Status Conference. Otherwise, the parties may appear at the June
28, 2024 Initial Status Conference to propose modification(s) to any aspect of the
CMO.
SUPERIOR
COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR
THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
ELIZABETH RAMIREZ v. RONALD
CRUZ ABARO DDS, INC. et al
24STCV05428
June 28, 2024
[TENTATIVE] CASE MANAGEMENT
ORDER
This action has been designated as
complex pursuant to CRC 3.400(a), and thus requires exceptional judicial
management. All provisions of this CMO are deemed necessary to carry out the
purposes of Rule 3.400(a), and to promote effective decision-making by the
Court. They are based upon individual consideration of this complex action, including
the Status Conference Reports previously filed by the parties.
1.
The
Parties have not identified any relevant arbitration agreements and/or class
action waiver clauses that may apply to the instant action.
2.
The
parties’ Joint Status Conference Statement filed on June 21, 2024 refers to
applications for fee waivers that certain Defendants have filed. On June 21, 2024, the Court ruled on and gave
notice of its rulings on such applications for fee waivers.
3.
The
Court hereby lifts the stay to permit Defendants to file and serve a Responsive
Pleading to the Complaint. Defendant must file and serve a Responsive Pleading no
later than July 29, 2024. Before
filing any demurrer or other motion, the moving party must contact the
Court Staff in Department 9 to obtain a hearing date and a briefing schedule. The Court sets a Non-Appearance Case Review
Re: Filing and Serving of Defendant’s Responsive Pleading for August 5, 2024, 8:30
AM, Department 9.
4.
Phased Discovery. Discovery
shall be phased. Discovery will be
phased with the stay lifted once Defendant’s answer is filed and served or, if
applicable, after the Court rules on any pleading challenge. At that time, the
Court will permit class certification discovery only. Informal discovery
is permitted. Merits-based discovery
will be allowed after a successful class certification motion. If there is a
dispute concerning whether a given discovery request is certification or
merits-based, the parties are to set up a telephonic conference with the court
pursuant to instruction herein.
5.
PAGA.
PAGA allegations and causes of action, if any, remain STAYED
until all class and individual allegations have been resolved.
6.
Class list discovery.
The decision in In Re Insurance Installment Fee cases (2012) 211
Cal.App.4th 1395, 1426-1429, held that the notice procedure prescribed by the
trial court and followed by the defendant was necessary to protect privacy
rights under the California Constitution.
The parties therefore shall use the procedure described in Belaire-West
Landscape v Superior Court (2008) 149 Cal.App.4th 554 to notify putative
class members, as described in the applicable paragraph of the currently
operative complaint, giving them the opportunity to opt out. The parties must share the cost of the
procedure equally.
a. Plaintiff
is to take the lead and prepare a proposed letter to be sent out by the
agreed-upon third party administrator.
The parties must discuss and settle upon a final version.
b. The
letter must be written using the administrator’s letterhead, not that of any
party.
c. The
defense must turn over the contact information consisting of name, address,
phone number, and email address (if available) to the third-party
administrator.
d. In the
event the putative class list is greater than 400 people, the administrator
must randomly select a sample of no more than 400. The contact information for those persons
who did not opt out must be turned over to the plaintiff.
7.
Payroll Records Discovery. Responses to any
payroll record discovery requests must be uniquely numbered and redacted so
that putative class member’s identifying information, i.e., name, social
security numbers, etc. are not revealed.
8.
Protective Order.
Parties are alerted that model protective orders may be found at Los
Angeles Superior Court website at http://www.lacourt.org/division/civil/CI0043.aspx. The parties are encouraged to use these model
orders as shown, or if modified, as a template for the modified order. A redlined courtesy copy must be posted on
the e-service bulletin board and lodged with the court at the time of filing.
The parties must use the redlined version to identify any changes proposed to
the model order.
9.
E-service & E-filing. Electronic service is not the same as
electronic filing. The parties have
agreed, and the Court has signed an order authorizing Case Anywhere as the
e-service to be used in this case.
Argument must not be posted on the bulletin board. For information on electronic filing in the
Complex Courts, please refer to https://www.lacourt.org/division/efiling/efiling2.aspx and http://www.lacourt.org/division/efiling/pdf/ComplexefilingFAQs.pdf.
10.
Class Certification Motion. Class
Certification Motion filing and serving deadline is June 30, 2025. The
plaintiff is reminded that the plaintiff’s brief must contain a trial
plan. The trial plan MUST be
filed as a separate brief. As with all
other motions, Counsel must call the Court to obtain a hearing date and
briefing schedule PRIOR to filing and serving the motion for Class
Certification. The Court sets a Non-Appearance
Case Review for July 7, 2025, 8:30 AM, Department 9.
11.
Telephonic conferences. The Court handles discovery motions
informally, using telephonic conferences and LA CourtConnect. Counsel must post
a message via their Electronic Service Provider to request any informal
discovery conference or other conference. The Court will either reply to the
message or issue a Minute Order setting the conference. The telephonic conference will automatically
be taken off calendar if all relevant parties have not scheduled the telephonic
conference with LA CourtConnect. Parties
must file and serve a 5-page joint brief two days before the conference. Since
these conferences are informal, no court reporter or audio recording is
permitted.
12.
Potential Related Cases. In the June 21, 2024 Joint Status Conference
Statement, Defendants state that they are Defendants uncertain as to the
existence of any actions with overlapping class definitions/related cases. If Counsel for any party (Plaintiff or
Defendants) is aware of any other action with overlapping class definitions or potentially
related cases, including PAGA actions seeking civil penalties for the same or
similar alleged Labor Code violations, that Counsel is ordered to file and
serve a Notice of Related Case. All Counsel
are ordered to file and serve a Notice of Related Case for any potentially
related cases pursuant California Rule of court Rule 3.300. This is a continuing obligation on both
plaintiffs and defendants while this case is pending. No later than July 10, 2024,
Counsel for each party is ordered to file either a notice of related cases
identifying all potentially related cases or a statement affirming that Counsel
is not aware of any other action with overlapping class definitions or
potentially related cases. The Court
sets a Non-Appearance Case Review for July 17, 2024, 8:30 AM,
Department 9.
13.
Settlement.
File a Notice of Settlement on Judicial Council form CM-200, a mandatory
form.
a. Consider using the form wage and hour
settlement agreements now available on the court’s website at https://www.lacourt.org/forms/all – “Civil Forms” section.
With input and unanimous consensus from an Ad Hoc Wage and Hour
Committee, the court posted: (1) a form class action settlement
agreement, (2) a form class action/PAGA settlement
agreement, (3) and a form PAGA settlement agreement. Using these
forms should cut down on attorney negotiation time and reduce the lag time
between a successful mediation and execution of a long form agreement. Filing a motion that is based on a form
agreement and includes a redlined copy identifying modifications will also
expedite the court’s review process and help reduce the current backlog on
hearings.
b. If settlement includes dismissal of
class action claims (such as a PAGA only settlement or an individual settlement), then Plaintiff
must comply with CRC 3.769 and 3.770 in order to obtain dismissal of class
claims. Do NOT use Judicial
Council Form Civ-110, Request for Dismissal.
The
Court's Judicial Assistant shall give notice of this order to Plaintiff.
Plaintiff is ordered to give formal notice to all other parties and to file
proof of service of such within 5 days of receipt of this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: June 28, 2024
__________________________
ELAINE
LU
Judge
of the Superior Court