Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 21STCV15281, Date: 2024-06-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV15281    Hearing Date: June 6, 2024    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiffs’ motion for approval of representative action settlement is GRANTED.

            On 3/28/2024, Plaintiffs Stephen Clegg and Michael Emmens, individually, and on behalf of other aggrieved employees, filed suit alleging: (1) violation of California Labor Code Sections 2800,2802, and 2804; (2) violation of Business and Professions Code section 17220.

Now, Plaintiff moves for approval of the Representative Action Settlement.

            The motion is unopposed.

Discussion

            The parties have agreed to a Gross Settlement Amount of $900,000. After deduction of attorney’s fees and litigation expenses, litigation enhancement to Plaintiffs, and settlement administration costs as discussed in the Agreement, the remaining amount to be divided between the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) and the aggrieved employees as required by Labor Code section 2699(i) is $562,222.68 with $421,667.01 (or 75%) going to the LWDA and $140,555.67 (or 25%) distributed to the aggrieved employees.

To determine whether a settlement is fair, adequate and reasonable, the court must independently and objectively analyze the evidence and circumstances before it in order to determine whether the settlement is in the best interests of those whose claims will be extinguished. (Kullar v. Foot Locker Retail, Inc.¿(2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 116, 130.) A non-exhaustive list of factors that the trial court should consider in evaluating the reasonableness of a class action settlement agreement includes the strength of plaintiffs' case, the risk, expense, complexity and likely duration of further litigation, the risk of maintaining class action status through trial, the amount offered in settlement, the extent of discovery completed and stage of the proceedings, the experience and views of counsel, the presence of a governmental participant, and the reaction of the class members to the proposed settlement. (Id. at 129.) 

            Here, the parties participated in two different mediations, and the Settlement Amount reflects the competing risks associated with litigating these claims. Plaintiffs’ motion thoroughly sets through an analysis of the competing risks here, to show that considerable thought and investigation was put into the decision to settle the claims.

            The Court also finds the $300,000, or 33.3% of the Gross Settlement Amount, and $19,077.32 in litigation reimbursement fees and costs to be reasonable.  (See Laffitte v. Robert Half Intern. Inc. (Cal. 2016) 205 Cal.Rptr.3d 555, 573.)

            Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs’ motion for approval of representative action settlement is granted.

It is so ordered.

Dated:  June    , 2024

   Hon. Jon R. Takasugi
   Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.  If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar.  For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517.