Judge: Marcella O. Mclaughlin, Case: 37-2023-00005328-CU-OE-CTL, Date: 2024-06-14 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - June 13, 2024

06/14/2024  09:00:00 AM  C-72 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Marcella O McLaughlin

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Other employment Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2023-00005328-CU-OE-CTL YANEZ VS ITS ABR INC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion - Other, 02/08/2024

The unopposed joint motion for approval of PAGA claim settlement is GRANTED.

As an initial matter, the parties' request for judicial notice (ROA 139) is denied. '[A] written trial court ruling has no precedential value.' Bolanos v. Superior Court (2008) 169 Cal.App.4th 744, 761.

Turning to the merits, PAGA settlements are subject to trial court review and approval. Lab. Code § 2699(l)(2). '[A] trial court should evaluate a PAGA settlement to determine whether it is fair, reasonable, and adequate in view of PAGA's purposes to remediate present labor law violations, deter future ones, and to maximize enforcement of state labor laws.' Moniz v. Adecco USA, Inc. (2021) 72 Cal.App.5th 56, 77. The court must 'scrutinize whether, in resolving the action, a PAGA plaintiff has adequately represented the state's interests, and hence the public interest.' Id. at 89.

Here, the total amount offered in the revised settlement for the PAGA claim is $16,666.56. This is a significant increase from the original settlement. See ROA 106. Moreover, the administration costs of $2,695 are appropriate for a case of this type. Accordingly, the court finds that the revised PAGA settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable in light of PAGA's policies and purposes. The court therefore approves the revised settlement.

The court will sign the proposed orders (ROA 140-141) submitted with the moving papers.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3137474  5