Judge Elaine Lu, Case Number: 24STCV24656, Date: 2025-01-31 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Elaine Lu, Case: 24STCV24656, Date: 2025-01-31 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV24656 Hearing Date: January 31, 2025 Dept: 9

Please note that the Initial Status Conference has been advanced to begin at 8:30 am on January 31, 2025 – not 10:00 am. The Court hereby distributes a tentative ruling for the CMO. The parties are welcome to provide input and propose modification(s) to any aspect of the CMO at the January 31, 2025 Initial Status Conference. If all parties submit on the tentative CMO prior to the commencement of the ISC, the Court will adopt the tentative CMO, and the parties need not appear.

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

Gina Harris v. Arhaus, LLC, et al.,

24STCV24656

[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. Defendant states that Plaintiff has signed an arbitration agreement with a class action waiver. Defendant also states that Defendant will move to compel arbitration if Plaintiff will not stipulate to arbitrate.

2. The Parties indicate that they are amenable to private mediation. The parties are ordered to file a Joint Status Report Re: Mediation Efforts, including the identity of any mediator they have selected and the date of any mediation they have scheduled, no later than March 27, 2025. A Non-Appearance Case Review Re Mediation Efforts is set for April 3, 2025 at 8:30 AM, Department 9. If the parties agree to a voluntary, informal exchange of discovery prior to mediating, the Court encourages (but does not require or order) the parties to include a verification with each production of discovery so that if the mediation is unsuccessful, the parties will not have to duplicate or repeat this exchange of discovery.

3. The Court hereby lifts the stay to permit Defendant to file and serve a Motion to Compel Arbitration or a Responsive Pleading to the Complaint. Defendant must file and serve a Motion to Compel Arbitration or a Responsive Pleading by no later than March 27, 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 Defendant’s Responsive Pleading for April 3, 2025, 8:30 AM, Department 9.

4. Phased Discovery. Discovery shall be phased. Upon the filing of any motion to compel arbitration, the stay shall be lifted, and the parties will be permitted to conduct discovery on the arbitration issue only. Once an answer is filed and served or, if applicable, after the Court rules on the motion to compel arbitration or pleading challenge, 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 arbitration based, or certification or merits-based, the parties are to set up a telephonic conference with the court pursuant to the instructions herein. If the parties schedule a mediation to occur before June 30, 2025 and if the parties wish to extend the stay on formal discovery beyond Defendant’s filing of an answer, the parties may file a stipulation and proposed order extending the stay on formal discovery until completion of mediation, and the Court will approve such stipulation.

5. 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. Upon the stay on class certification discovery being lifted, 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.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. Class Certification Motion. The Court will set a deadline for filing and serving the Class Certification Motion after ruling on the anticipated Motion to Compel Arbitration. If no party files a Motion to Compel Arbitration, then the Court will set a deadline for filing and serving the Class Certification Motion upon the filing of all Defendants’ responsive pleadings.

10. 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.

11. 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. In particular, the parties are ordered to file a notice of related cases seeking to relate Gina Harris, et al. v. Arhaus, LLC; Arhaus, Inc., et al., Los Angeles County Superior Court Case No. 24STCV31631. The parties must file and serve the notice of related cases in both cases no later than February 18, 2025. The Court sets a Non-Appearance Case Review Re: Filing and Serving of Defendant’s Responsive Pleading for February 25, 2025, 8:30 AM, Department 9.

12.

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 the instant signed order from the Court’s website, to give formal notice to all other parties, and to file proof of service of such within five (5) days.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 31, 2025

__________________________

ELAINE LU

Judge of the Superior Court