Judge: Elaine Lu, Case: 24STCV21789, Date: 2025-06-16 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24STCV21789 Hearing Date: June 17, 2025 Dept: 9
Department 9 will be dark on June 16, 2025. The Initial
Status Conference currently set for June 16, 2025 shall be CONTINUED to June
17, 2025 at 10 am. The
Court hereby distributes a tentative ruling for the Case Management Order. The parties are welcome to provide input and
propose modification(s) to any aspect of the CMO at the Initial Status
Conference. If all parties submit on the
tentative CMO prior to 8:30 am on June 17, 2025, then the Court
will adopt the tentative CMO on June 17, 2025, and the parties need not appear. However, if there is any party who has NOT
submitted on the tentative CMO by 8:30 am on June 17, 2025, then all parties will
be heard at the continued ISC on June 17 as to any matter that any party would
like to discuss.
SUPERIOR
COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR
THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
REBEKKA
LIEN vs BILLION DOLLAR BABY ENTERTAINMENT, LLC
24STCV21789
[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 agreed to private mediation and will begin exchanging mediator
names to attempt to agree on a mediator, with the aim of mediating this matter
no later than October 2025. The parties
are ordered to file a Joint Status Report Re: Mediation Efforts by no later
than November 13, 2025. A Non-Appearance
Case Review re mediation efforts is set for November 20, 2025 at 8:30 AM,
Department 9.
2.
The
Parties are unaware of any relevant arbitration agreements and/or class action waiver
clauses.
3.
Defendants
filed an answer on May 13, 2025. However,
in the Joint Initial Status Conference Statement, Defendants state that they reserve
the right to file a proper responsive pleading at a later time, which may be a
motion to strike or demurrer on the basis that Jonathan Kirk should not be
named. As Defendants have already
answered, a demurrer would not be the appropriate vehicle to raise this argument. However, Defendants may file a motion for
judgment on the pleadings, which is governed by the same standard as a
demurrer, and Defendants may also file a motion to strike. It is a priority for Defendants to file any
such motions challenging the pleadings so that the pleadings will be confirmed
before the Parties commence discovery.
Accordingly, if Defendants wish to file a motion for judgment on the
pleadings and/or a motion to strike, Defendants must do so by no later than July
17, 2025. Before filing any 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
Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings and/or a motion to strike for July
24, 2025, 8:30 AM, Department 9.
4.
The
operative complaint currently does not include any claim for civil penalties
pursuant to Labor Code section 2699 (PAGA penalties). By no later than July 17, 2025,
Plaintiff must file and serve a status report as to: (a) whether Plaintiff
intends to either file a separate action for PAGA penalties or file an amended
complaint in the instant action adding a claim for PAGA penalties; and (b) if
so, when Plaintiff intends to file the claim for PAGA penalties (either as a
complaint in a separate action or by way of amendment to the complaint in this
action). In addition, if by July 17,
2025 Plaintiff is prepared to file an amended complaint in the instant
action adding a claim for PAGA penalties, the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiff
leave to do so; Plaintiff may file an amended complaint in the instant action
adding a claim for PAGA penalties on or before July 17, 2025. A Non-Appearance Case Review Re Status
Report Re Potential Addition of PAGA Penalties is set for July 24, 2025 at
8:30 am, Department 9.
5.
Phased Discovery. Discovery
shall be phased. Discovery will be
phased with the stay lifted once Defendant files and serves an answer 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 the instructions herein.
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.
Therefore, upon the Court’s lifting of the stay on class certification
discovery, the parties 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 July 17, 2026.
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 24, 2026, 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. 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, including any PAGA case involving the same
representative plaintiff. This is a
continuing obligation on both plaintiffs and defendants while this case is
pending.
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.
Plaintiff
is ordered to download (1) the instant signed order from the Court’s
website, (2) the minute order for today, and (3) the signed order authorizing
electronic service provider, to give formal notice of each of these to all
other parties, and to file proof of service of such within five (5) days.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: June 17, 2025
__________________________
ELAINE
LU
Judge
of the Superior Court