Judge: Elaine Lu, Case: 25STCV04199, Date: 2025-05-15 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 25STCV04199 Hearing Date: May 15, 2025 Dept: 9
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 the commencement of the May 15, 2025 ISC, the Court will
adopt the tentative CMO, and the parties need not appear. However, if there is any matter not addressed
in the CMO that any party would like to discuss, that party should not submit
on this tentative but instead appear at the ISC to raise the issue.
SUPERIOR
COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR
THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
JOHN
H. WASHINGTON vs VEVA ENTERTAINMENT, CO., et al,
25STCV04199
[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 are unaware of any relevant arbitration agreements and/or class action
waiver clauses.
2.
Plaintiff’s
Counsel has failed to file proof of service of the Operative Summons and
Complaint on all named defendants, including VEVA ENTERTAINMENT CO., A
CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY. By
no later than June 16, 2025, Plaintiff’s Counsel must file either
proof of service of the Operative Summons and Complaint on VEVA ENTERTAINMENT
CO., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY or a declaration explaining the
failure to file proofs of service of the operative Summons and Complaint on VEVA
ENTERTAINMENT CO., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, setting forth any
and all efforts undertaken to attempt service of the operative Summons and
Complaint on VEVA ENTERTAINMENT CO., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY,
and explaining why sanctions (including monetary sanctions of at least $1,000)
should not be imposed for failure to file proof of service of the operative
Summons and Complaint on all of the named defendants, in compliance with
California Rules of Court, Rule 3.720. Failure
to file proof of service of the Operative Summons and Complaint on VEVA
ENTERTAINMENT CO., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY by June 16, 2025
may result in the Court setting an OSC re sanctions. A non-appearance case review is set for June
23, 2025 at 8:30 am in Department 9 re filing of proof of service of the operative
Summons and Complaint on VEVA ENTERTAINMENT CO., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY.
3.
Veva
Entertainment Co, Inc. states in the Joint Initial Status Conference Statement
that it was erroneously sued as "VEVA ENTERTAINMENT, CO., a California
Limited Liability Company" and "VEVA ENTERTAINMENT CO, INC., an
unknown business entity. Veva
Entertainment Co, Inc. believes that this erroneous naming of the defendant has
been corrected in the Notice of Appearance, but a Notice of Appearance is
insufficient by itself to correct this error.
Plaintiff has never named Veva Entertainment Co, Inc. as a defendant in
this action. Nor has Plaintiff ever dismissed
the allegedly erroneously named entities, VEVA ENTERTAINMENT, CO. and VEVA ENTERTAINMENT
CO., INC. The parties are ordered to meet
and confer regarding the true and correct identity of the entity defendants. If the parties are able to stipulate to
addition of VEVA ENTERTAINMENT CO, INC. as a defendant and dismissal of VEVA
ENTERTAINMENT, CO. and VEVA ENTERTAINMENT CO., INC., then the parties should
file a stipulation signed by all parties (including the individual defendants)
and proposed order to this effect by no
later than June 16, 2025. If the parties
are unable to resolve this issue by stipulation, then (a) Defendant will have
to pursue the dismissal of VEVA ENTERTAINMENT, CO. and VEVA ENTERTAINMENT CO.,
INC. by way of a dispositive motion, such as a demurrer or motion for summary
judgment, and (b) by no later than June 16, 2025, the parties must file
a Joint Statement regarding their respective positions as to the dismissal of VEVA
ENTERTAINMENT, CO. and VEVA ENTERTAINMENT CO., INC. and the addition of Veva
Entertainment Co, Inc. (which may be effected by way of a Doe amendment to be
filed by no later than June 16, 2025).
A Non-Appearance Case Review is set for June 23, 2025 at 8:30 am
re Filing of Joint Statement or Stipulation and Proposed Order re Dismissal of VEVA
ENTERTAINMENT, CO. and VEVA ENTERTAINMENT CO., INC. and the Potential Addition
of Veva Entertainment Co, Inc.
4.
The
Parties indicate that they are open to exploring private mediation if their own
settlement discussions do not lead to a settlement. The parties are ordered to meet and confer
and if agreeable to all parties schedule a mediation. The parties are further ordered to file a
Joint Status Report Re: Mediation Efforts, including whether the Parties have mediated
and the outcome of any mediation by no later than November 5, 2025. A Non-Appearance Case Review Re Mediation Efforts
is set for November 12, 2025 at 8:30 AM, Department 9.
5.
Pursuant
to paragraph 3 above, the identity of the defendants named in the operative
complaint should be clear by no later than June 16, 2025. The Court hereby lifts the stay to permit Defendants
to file and serve a Responsive Pleading to the operative Complaint. Defendants
must file and serve a Responsive Pleading by no later than July 30, 2025. 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 July 18, 2025, 8:30 AM, Department 9.
6.
The
operative complaint currently does not include any claim for civil penalties
pursuant to Labor Code section 2699 (PAGA penalties). By no later than June 16, 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). A Non-Appearance Case Review
Re Status Report Re Potential Addition of PAGA Penalties is set for June 23,
2025 at 8:30 am, Department 9.
7.
Phased Discovery. Discovery
shall be phased. Discovery will be
phased with the stay lifted once all Defendants have filed and served 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.
8.
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.
9.
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.
10.
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.
11.
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.
12.
Class Certification Motion. Class
Certification Motion filing and serving deadline is May 15, 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 May 22, 2026, 8:30
AM, Department 9.
13.
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.
14.
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.
15.
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: May 15, 2025
__________________________
ELAINE
LU
Judge
of the Superior Court