Judge: Randall J. Sherman, Case: 2020-01175391, Date: 2022-09-16 Tentative Ruling

The tentative ruling is to continue the hearing on plaintiff’s Motion for Approval of Settlement under the Private Attorneys General Act to December 16, 2022 at 10:00 a.m.  Counsel must file supplemental papers addressing the court’s concerns (not fully revised papers that would have to be re-read) at least 16 days before the next hearing date.  Counsel must submit an amendment to the settlement agreement rather than any amended settlement agreement.  Counsel also must provide a red-lined version of any revised papers, including the proposed letter to the aggrieved employees.  Counsel also should provide the court with an explanation of how the pending issues were resolved, with references to any corrections to the settlement agreement and the proposed letter to the aggrieved employees, rather than with just a supplemental declaration simply asserting that the issues have been resolved.

The list of released claims in §I.Z of the settlement agreement is overbroad.  The release must be limited to claims that are asserted in the operative pleading or that could be asserted based on the facts alleged in the operative pleading.  Amaro vs. Anaheim Arena Management, LLC (2021) 69 Cal. App. 5th 521, 537 (4th Dist., Div. 3).  The release here purports to release claims for unlawful paycheck deductions under Labor Code §§221, 222, 223, 225.5 and 2699, and claims for unreimbursed business expenses under Labor Code §2802.  Neither of these violations are alleged in the Complaint.  The parties may not call for the release of claims that were only raised in plaintiff’s PAGA letter, under the Amaro case.

The exposure analysis in ¶18 of the Crosner Declaration does not include the claims for the failure to provide paid sick leave under Labor Code §233, 234 and 245-248.5 (or the claims in the PAGA letter but not the Complaint for unlawful paycheck deductions and unreimbursed business expenses).

The settlement agreement in §V.f.ii does not provide for an extension to cash re-mailed checks if a check is re-mailed due to being undeliverable.

Plaintiff did not provide the court with his separate individual settlement and release agreement, referenced in §VI.b of the settlement agreement.  He must do so.

The proposed cover letter to be sent to the aggrieved employees with their penalty checks explains the purpose of the checks, but it fails to explain that no claims for any unpaid or underpaid wages have settled, and that this settlement is without prejudice to any pursuit of such claims.  The letter must be revised accordingly.

The Status Conference set for September 22, 2022 is ordered off calendar.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of the ruling to the LWDA and to defendants.