Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 22STCV34678, Date: 2023-07-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV34678    Hearing Date: July 6, 2023    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

The Parties’ motion to approval the PAGA settlement is GRANTED.

            On 10/28/2022, Plaintiff Miguel Angel Camacho (Plaintiff) filed suit against Buena Vida Learning Services, Inc. (Defendant), alleging: (1) failure to pay wages; (2) failure to pay overtime compensation; (3) failure to provide meal and rest periods; (4) failure to provide itemized wage and hour statements; (5) waiting time penalties; (6) Private Attorney General Act (PAGA); (7) failure to permit inspection of personnel and payroll records; and (8) unfair competition.

            Now, Plaintiff and Defendant (collectively, the Parties) jointly more for an order approving the PAGA settlement.

Discussion

            The Settlement Agreement provides for the following resolution of Plaintiff’s PAGA claim:

-         Gross Settlement Amount: $720,000.00

-         Attorney’s Fees: $324,000.00

-         Third Party Administrator (ILYM) Costs: $5,000.00

-         Net Settlement Amount: $391,000.00

-         LWDA Penalty Share (75%): $293,250.00

-         Aggrieved Employees (25%): $97,750.00

(Geshgian Decl. ¶ 13; Exh. 2, at pp. 4-5.)

A settlement reached between the parties on a PAGA claim is subject to court review and approval. (Lab. Code §2699(l).) While the statute does not set forth the factors to be considered for approval, approval is generally warranted if the settlement falls within a “reasonable range.” (See North County Contractor’s Ass’n., Inc. v. Touchstone Ins. Servs. (1994) 27 Cal. App. 4th 1085, 1089-90.)

Reasonableness and fairness are presumed where (1) the settlement is reached through “arms-length bargaining”; (2) investigation and discovery are “sufficient to allow counsel and the court to act intelligently”; (3) counsel is “experienced in similar litigation”; and (4) the percentage of objectors “is small.” (Dunk v. Ford Motor Co. (1996). 48 Cal. App. 4th 1794, 1802.)

Here, the Parties each party diligently and independently investigated the merits of Plaintiff’s claims, and participated in a thorough mediation. Moreover, the Parties set forth extensive explanation of how the parties assessed and calculated the potential claims, damages, and risks. (See Motion, 5:12-8:11.) The Parties also set forth adequate justification of the $324,000.00 claimed in attorney fees.

Based on the foregoing, the Parties’ motion to approval the PAGA settlement is granted. 

It is so ordered.

Dated:  July    , 2023

   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.