Excerpt: ...rejected by the clerk it was served on Defendants and the Court has reviewed it. For the following reasons, the motion is granted. Request for Judicial Notice Defendant requests Judicial Notice of several orders in case no. C18‐02245 as well as several County Recorder documents. The Request is unopposed. The request is granted. Evid. Code §§ 452, 453. Vexatious Litigant Statute Code Civ. Proc., section 391 provides: As used in this title, the...

Excerpt: ... (1) negligence; (2) negligent infliction of emotional distress; (3) conversion; and (4) conversion (bailment). Defendant PSF Danville, LLC only demurs to Plaintiff's claims for (2) negligent infliction of emotional distress and (4) conversion (bailment). The remaining Defendants demur to all of Plaintiff's claims. For the following reasons the Demurrer is sustained, with leave to amend. Request for Judicial Notice Defendants request Judicial Not...

Excerpt: ...bitration agreements and nondisclosure agreements are all integral parts of the employment relationship between plaintiff as employer and defendants Anthony Bishop and John Karimov; (2) plaintiff's claims are “intimately founded in and intertwined with” that employment relationship. (Boucher v. Alliance Title Co., Inc. (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 262, 272‐273.) The general rule governing this issue is articulated in the Goldman decision as follo...

Excerpt: ...1) violation of Civil Code § 2923.6 and § 2924.11; (2) negligence; and (3) violation of Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq. Defendants move for summary judgment on several grounds: (1) the action is barred by a 2015 settlement agreement; (2) the action is barred by the doctrine of bankruptcy estoppel; (3) plaintiff cannot prove a dual‐tracking violation; (4) plaintiff cannot prove negligence; and (5) plaintiff does not have a predicate statuto...

Excerpt: ...endants provide alarm services to homes and businesses, and plaintiff was a customer. The standard contract used provides that a customer may cancel the contract in writing 30 days before the end of the contract term, or it automatically renews. Plaintiff alleged that she cancelled, yet defendants continued to bill her under the contract, and that defendants followed the same conduct with respect to the entire class. Under the settlement, a class...

Excerpt: ...original complaint, filed August 24, 2018, alleged that defendant Foss Maritime committed various violations of wage and hour laws with respect to the employment of captains and crew members on tugboats Foss Maritime operates. After removal to federal court and a subsequent remand, the operative pleading is the Second Amended Complaint, filed June 21, 2019, which expanded the scope of the initial allegations. Discovery was taken and the matter se...

Excerpt: ... filed a motion to leave to file a second amended complaint, but the motion was never heard and the pleading was not filed.) The First Amended Complaint alleges failure to pay required overtime, failure to maintain accurate records, failure to furnish proper wage statements, and derivative waiting time violations. CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 39 HEARING DATE: 06/11/20 ‐ 3 ‐ The agreement provides three separate...

Excerpt: ...ious wage and hour law requirements. Specifically, plaintiffs allege that wage statements did not accurately identify the proper rate of pay when double overtime wages were paid. The gross settlement amount is $240,000. The settlement was negotiated with the assistance of an experienced mediator. Notice of the PAGA claims was provided to the Labor & Workforce Development Agency. The settlement motion was provided to the LWDA on September 12, 2019...

Excerpt: ...round/Terms of the Settlement The gross settlement amount is $750,000, non‐ reversionary. Class counsel requests a fee of one‐third of that amount. Costs of $15,000, a plaintiff's enhancement fee of $7,500, and settlement administration costs of approximately $10,000, would be deducted from that amount, leaving a payment to the class of $467,500. The settlement was negotiated with the assistance of an experienced mediator. The Complaint does ...

Excerpt: ...igors on a contract. Section 877.6 applies in actions where “it is alleged that two or more parties are joint tortfeasors or co‐ obligors on a contract debt…” Section 877 explains that a good faith settlement determination applies in cases with “one or more of a number of tortfeasors claimed to be liable for the same tort, or to one or more other co‐obligors mutually subject to contribution rights.” The requirement that there be joi...

Excerpt: ...which alleged failure to pay wages, failure to provide meal and rest periods, wage statement violations, and waiting time violations. The parties moved for preliminary approval of the settlement, which was granted on January 7, 2020. The agreement, as drafted, provides a settlement class consisting of non‐exempt employees employed from July 6, 2014, through the date of preliminary approval, and is estimated to include 163 potential members. A g...

Excerpt: ...s settlement amount is $750,000, non‐reversionary. Class counsel requests a fee of one‐third of that amount. Costs of $15,000, a plaintiff's enhancement fee of $7,500, and settlement administration costs of approximately $10,000, would be deducted from that amount, leaving a payment to the class of $467,500. The settlement was negotiated with the assistance of an experienced mediator. The Complaint does not allege, and the settlement does not...

Excerpt: ...lawsuit pursuant to a subcontract with developer and cross‐complainant, Kiper Development, Inc. (“Kiper”). (Lee Decl. ¶¶3, 6‐7.) Plaintiff homeowners sued Kiper for alleged defects and Kiper cross‐complained against Precision. Kiper asserts claims for express and implied indemnity, breach of implied and express warranties, negligence, breach of contract, and declaratory relief. (Lee Decl. ¶¶4‐5.) Investigations revealed only one s...

Excerpt: ...ns arising from those failures. The motion for preliminary approval initially was set for hearing October 17, 2019, and the day before the hearing, the Court issued a tentative ruling setting forth specified concerns, and requesting supplemental briefing. The matter was continued to January 9, 2020. After the submission of supplemental information, the Court granted preliminary approval of the settlement and set this hearing on the motion for fin...

Excerpt: ...ivative violations arising from the meal and rest break violations. The agreement provides a settlement class consisting of non‐exempt employees employed from January 22, 2015, through the date of preliminary approval, and is estimated to include 340 to 395 members. A gross settlement of $315,000, non‐reversionary, will be paid to the Settlement Administrator. The employer's share of payroll taxes (not income tax withholding) on the wage port...

Excerpt: ...o rely on Ms. Concilio, who is not an attorney, to “take care of” the matter for them; (b) they delayed four months after notice of entry of the default; and (c) the delay has prejudiced it, because the remodeling of the premises has been completed. The court may set aside a default that was taken against a party “through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.” (C.C.P. § 473(b).) Courts have taken a relatively ...

Excerpt: ... at the hearing. In April of 2018, the Town of Moraga (“Town” or “Moraga”), adopted a series of changes to existing ordinances governing development on hillsides (the “Hillside Regulations” or the “Project”). Petitioner David Bruzzone lives in Moraga, while petitioner Jane Bruzzone lives in Lafayette. The Bruzzones own properties governed by the Project, and pose two challenges to it: (1) that the Town should have prepared an Envi...

Excerpt: ...s are the owners of six homes in the development which they allege have various construction defects. The owners of four of the homes purchased their homes directly from Shea, and the other owners are subsequent purchasers. Shea contends that Plaintiffs are bound by the pre‐ litigation alternative dispute resolution procedures under the purchase contracts, the recorded Master Declaration and Individual Declarations. Shea asserts Plaintiffs have...

Excerpt: ...ms to have mistaken permanent injunctions for preliminary injunctions. Permanent injunctions are a post‐trial remedy. Because this case is before trial, the Court considers the Motion to be an application for preliminary injunction. The ruling on an application for preliminary injunction rests in the sound discretion of the trial court. (Whyte v. Schlage Lock Co. (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 1443, 1450.) “An injunction properly issues only where th...

Excerpt: ... relatively general objections, the opposing party submits justification for the costs, and the defendant replies, the true nature of the dispute is apparently only based on what remains in the moving party's reply. Two such items remain. A. Item 1: Filing Fees. Plaintiffs assert that to the extent costs were incurred for “fax‐filing” fees, they are unreasonable. “Fax‐filing” fees are fees charged by a third party vendor to accept by ...

Excerpt: ...n for Forum non Conveniens, based on a clause of the CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 39 HEARING DATE: 02/27/20 ‐ 2 ‐ Employment Agreement calling for any such dispute to be litigated in Franklin County, Ohio. Because that forum selection clause is voidable under Labor Code section 925, the motion is denied. Key Facts Plaintiff began working for defendant in October 2014 as a Sales Manager in Training under a writt...

Excerpt: ...mmand that PAGA settlements be approved by the court necessarily implies that there is some substantive dimension to the review. (Labor Code § 2699(l).) The Court has found no binding authority, but one federal District Court has addressed the issue. In O'Connor v. Uber Techs, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2016) 201 F.Supp.3d 1110, 1133, the court denied approval of class action settlements that included PAGA claims in part because the plaintiffs' claims adde...

Excerpt: ... duty to protect the rights of absent class members. (Pirjada v. Superior Court (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 1074, 1082.) Thus, the Court CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 39 HEARING DATE: 02/06/20 ‐ 2 ‐ must determine whether to grant the dismissal. Dismissal must be allowed absent good cause to the contrary. (CRC 3.1385(b).) The claims in this case are the same as those made in another case in federal court, Palega v. T...

Excerpt: ...d breach of contract arising out of Meritage's residential development known as Copper Ridge in Antioch. Meritage moves to compel arbitration of the claims and to stay the action pending arbitration, and Plaintiffs oppose the motion. For the reasons set forth, the motion is GRANTED. Summary of the Motion and Opposition Plaintiffs are either original purchasers or subsequent purchasers of single family residences built by Meritage at the Copper Ri...

Excerpt: ...ction as unlimited granted[,]” and “case to be transferred to unlimited civil in Martinez.” The court file shows that the matter was formally transferred and assigned a new docket number on October 21, 2019. On December 11, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment, including a request that the matter be set for hearing at a particular date. The matter was set for hearing in this department. After the matter was set for hearing, i...