Judge Robert C. Longstreth, Case 37-2020-00016112-CU-OE-CTL 2023-12-15 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Robert C. Longstreth, Case: 37-2020-00016112-CU-OE-CTL, Date: 2023-12-15 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - December 14, 2023

12/15/2023 08:30:00 AM C-65 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Robert Longstreth

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited Other employment Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2020-00016112-CU-OE-CTL MARTIN VS. HERC RENTALS INC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion - Other, 11/17/2023

Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement (ROA 99) is DENIED.

'[A] court cannot release claims that are outside the scope of the allegations of the complaint.' (Amaro v. Anaheim Arena Management, LLC (2021) 69 Cal.App.5th 521, 537.) On May 12, 2023, the court denied Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement on the grounds the proposed settlement sought to release not only Plaintiff Martin's claims in this lawsuit but also the claims asserted by Erik Rudolph in a separate lawsuit initially filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court that was removed to federal court (Rudolph v. Herc Rentals, Inc., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. Case No. 20STCCV14715, U.S. District Court, Central District of California Case No.

2:20-cv-05412 ODW). (Short Decl., Exh. A, ¶ A(2), D(1).) Rudolph has now joined this action as a plaintiff by way of the Second Amended Complaint. However, the court's prior concern remains unresolved, since the proposed settlement agreement still seeks to release claims asserted by Rudolph in a separate pending federal action. Plaintiffs have not provided the court with copies of the pleadings in the separate action; accordingly, the court cannot determine the scope of what claims in that action would be released. Nor, despite the concerns raised by the court seven months ago, have Plaintiffs provided authority addressing whether the court has jurisdiction to release those claims. Thus, Plaintiffs still have not sufficiently demonstrated to the court that approval of the settlement would not result in the improper release of claims. (Amaro at p. 537.) Calendar No.: Event ID: TENTATIVE RULINGS

3046268 4