Excerpt: ...lleging that defendant violated the Labor Code in various ways, all of which arose from underpayment of sick pay. The settlement would create a gross settlement fund of $95,000. The class representative payment to the plaintiff would be $10,000. Counsel's attorney's fees would be $31,666.67 (one‐third of the settlement). Litigation costs are estimated at $15,000. The settlement administrator (Phoenix) would receive an estimated $4,500. PAGA pen...

Excerpt: ... complaint alleging that defendant violated the Labor Code by filing to provide required overtime and minimum wages, meal and rest periods, proper wage statements, and reimbursement of employee business expenses. The case does not include a claim under PAGA. The settlement would create a gross settlement fund of $400,000. The class representative payment would be $7,500 each, totaling $15,000. Counsel's attorney's fees would be $140,000 (35% of t...

Excerpt: ...petition and complaint on June 7, 2021. They sued for (1) writ of mandate (fair hearing and failure to make findings supported by the evidence), (2) writ of mandate (Housing Accountability Act), (3) violation of Civil Rights (U.S. Constitution and 42 U.S.C §1983), (4) inverse condemnation (California Constitution) and (5) declaratory relief. The Court heard the writ claims first and issued a decision denying both writ claims on June 21, 2022. Th...

Excerpt: ...exempt employees alleging that defendant violated the Labor Code in various ways, primarily focused on the allegation that defendant paid sick leave at the base rate of pay instead of the regular rate of pay. The settlement would create a gross settlement fund of $3,250,000. The class representative payment to plaintiff would be $10,000. Counsel's attorney's fees would be $1,083,333.33 (one‐third of the settlement). Litigation costs would not e...

Excerpt: ...ate nuisance, (5) public nuisance, (6) declaratory relief. For the reasons set forth below, the Demurrer is sustained in part and overruled in part, as outlined below. The City is granted leave to amend. CRPC's request for judicial notice regarding the Antioch Municipal Code is granted. (Cal. Evid. Code § 452 (b), (c).) Factual Allegations On January 8, 1991, the City Council of the City of Antioch (“City Council”) granted a 25‐year Franch...

Excerpt: ...nt violated the Labor Code in various ways, including unpaid overtime, unpaid minimum wage, off‐the‐clock work, non‐compliant meal and rest periods, unreimbursed business expenses, waiting time, and wage statement claims. The settlement would create a gross settlement fund of $224,400. The class representative payment to the plaintiff would be $10,000. Counsel's attorney's fees would be $74,800 (one‐third of the settlement). Litigation co...

Excerpt: ...nt violated the Labor Code in various ways, including unpaid overtime, unpaid minimum wage, non‐compliant meal and rest periods (all primarily based on off‐the‐clock work), and waiting time and wage statement claims. The settlement would create a gross settlement fund of $726,600. The class representative payment to the plaintiff would be $5,000. Counsel's attorney's fees would be $242,000 (one‐third of the settlement). Litigation costs a...

Excerpt: ...breaks, failure to pay minimum wages and overtime, and cascading derivative violations. The complaint was filed March 9, 2021, initially as a class action. PAGA claims were added by a First Amended Complaint May 20, 2021, and the Court approved dismissal of the class and individual claims on June 7, 2021. The total settlement payment is $170,000. This is composed of attorney's fees of $56,666.66 (one‐third of the recovery), a ceiling on litigat...

Excerpt: ...misrepresentation, (3) intentional misrepresentation, (4) fraud, (5) negligence, (6) implied indemnity, (7) equitable indemnity, (8) comparative indemnity, (9) contribution, (10) declaratory relief, (11) violation of prompt payment act, (12) common counts—money paid, (13) quantum meruit, and (14) alter ego liability. Cross‐Defendant demurs to Cross‐Complainant's fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth causes of action pursuant to Co...

Excerpt: ...ful death, (2) wrongful death based on negligent supervision, training discipline and retention, (3) Bane Act, and (4) negligent infliction of emotional distress. Negligent Hiring, Supervision, Training and Retention (C/A 2) and Bane Act (C/A 3) The Court previously found that Plaintiffs had not stated a claim as to negligent hiring, supervision, training and retention and as to the Bane Act claim. The Third Amended Complaint does not change the ...

Excerpt: ...wages and overtime, failure to reimburse business expenses, and cascading derivative violations. The total settlement payment is $215,000. This is composed of attorney's fees of $71,666.66 (one‐third of the recovery), $12,829.83 in litigation costs, and up to $4,500 in costs to the settlement administrator (Phoenix). PAGA penalties of $126,003.51 would be apportioned 75% to the LWDA SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY MARTINEZ, CA...

Excerpt: ...rest; (3) the party conferred a significant benefit, whether pecuniary or nonpecuniary, on the public; and (4) the necessity and financial burden of private enforcement makes an award appropriate. (1) Prevailing Party The Real Party in Interest prevailed in the case. A Real Party in Interest is eligible for fees as a prevailing party, if it meets the other statutory criteria. (Early v. Becerra (2021) 60 Cal.App.5th 726, 736.) (2) Public Interest ...

Excerpt: ... a motion for summary judgment. ProWest then made a Code of Civil Procedure section 998 offer for $159,000. Ultimately, the offer was accepted. Elite was a subcontractor of ProWest. Elite demanded payment, including from the surety, and was not paid. Elite filed a mechanics lien and subsequent suit. It filed a motion for summary adjudication. In addition, the property owner (San Ramon Owner) filed an action against ProWest, which resulted in ProW...

Excerpt: ...the submission of the motion, the parties submitted a declaration pursuant to Rule of Court 3.770 There are two claims against the State defendants in the Third Amended Complaint. The First cause of action is for violations of Education Code section 56000 (right to a Free and Appropriate Education), and alleges that the plaintiffs “suffer, will suffer, or have suffered, irreparable harm, including substantial losses of educational opportunities...

Excerpt: .... (Compl. ¶ 2.) She filed her complaint initiating this action on April 7, 2021, alleging a single cause of action under the Private Attorney General Act, Labor Code section 2699 et seq. ("PAGA") for violation of Labor Code section 2751(a). The complaint alleges that Broker violated Labor Code section 2751(a) by its failure to include or disclose its "lean in" policy affecting the employees' commissions. Defendant Broker filed its answer to the ...

Excerpt: ...of 5 Mile Road, which is located in El Dorado County. The accident occurred when Defendants vehicle made a left turn across US‐50, in front of Plaintiff's vehicle, resulting in a collision. Emergency medical attention was performed on location and at a local hospital in El Dorado County, and one of the Plaintiff was airlifted to a hospital in Placer County. Both Defendants are residents of Contra Costa County. All five Plaintiffs are residents ...

Excerpt: ...URT OF CALIFORNIA, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY MARTINEZ, CA DEPARTMENT 39 HEARING DATE: 08/25/2022 decision Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (2022) 142 S.Ct. 1906 (“Viking”). Opposing the MTC, Ely contends (1) that the arbitration agreement in this case is materially different from the one at issue in Viking, such that Viking does not control the outcome here; and, (2) that WCA waived its right to seek arbitration in this matter. Requests for Ju...

Excerpt: ...). Each case alleges that defendant has violated various wage & hour requirements of the California Labor Code, and sues under the Private Attorneys General Act. On July 10, 2022, the Chief Justice, acting as Chair of the Judicial Council, assigned the determination of the petition to the Contra Costa Superior Court. On July 27, 2022, the Presiding Judge of this Court assigned this Court as the Coordination Motion Judge. Pursuant to Rule of Court...

Excerpt: ...s as follows: (a) PSG's motion to strike is denied in part, and denied in part as moot as set forth below; (b) Gamma Defendants' motion to strike is denied in part,, and denied in part as moot as set forth below, and granted in part only as to Prayer for Relief paragraph 2; and (c) PIIC's motion to strike is denied in part, and granted in part, as detailed in the ruling below. Legal Standards Applicable to Motion to Strike The Court may strike al...

Excerpt: ... 452(h).) Factual Background: Plaintiff Patrick Humphreys (“Plaintiff”) worked for Defendant Total‐ Western, Inc. (“Defendant”) from approximately November 2020 through March 1, 2021. He was a non‐ exempt Laborer, and a union employee. During his employment, Plaintiff was a member of the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, Local 1945 (the “Union�...

Excerpt: ...p, took him to the ground and tased him (twice). After a jury trial, the jury found for defendants on each cause of action. More specifically, Smith moves that the Court grant partial judgment in his favor on his claim for Battery and his claim under the Bane Act., on the ground that there is no substantial evidence to support the jury's verdict on either of these two claims. Facts: Parsley observed Smith driving too fast and recklessly through a...

Excerpt: ...d and Settlement Terms The original complaint was filed by Davis, Nelson‐Stark and Riley on March 29, 2019, under PAGA only, alleging only a claim for failure to provide suitable seating. On May 15, 2019, Clark filed a class action alleging various violations of wage and hour requirements, as well as a suitable seating claim. On January 3, 2020, Clark filed a First Amended complaint also adding a PAGA claim. That matter was removed to federal C...

Excerpt: ...information and makes its final ruling. (Part II.) I. Initial Tentative Ruling A. Background of the Case and Terms of Settlement This a PAGA case (not a class action), alleging a variety of violations of the Labor Code concerning failure to provide rest and meal breaks, failure to pay minimum wages and overtime, and cascading derivative violations. Defendant provides medical care for elderly patients. The total settlement payment is $95,000. This...

Excerpt: ...ruled as to the Eighth Cause of Action for violation of the Unfair Competition Law. The demurrer is sustained without leave to amend as to all of the remaining causes of action that are the subject of the demurrer: the Second, Third, Sixth, Seventh, and Ninth through Twelfth Causes of Action. CCI shall file an answer on or before August 26, 2022. The basis for this ruling is as follows. 2nd C/A. The Second Cause of Action is for breach of the imp...

Excerpt: ...ners") against the California Department of Toxic Substances Control ("DTSC") and California Environmental Protection Agency ("CalEPA") as Respondents. HRP Campus Bay Property, LLC ("HRP" or "Developer") is named as the lead Real Party in Interest, in addition to other several other entities which have not appeared. Petitioners dismissed real party in interest Zeneca, Inc. For the reasons set forth, the Court requests further briefing on certain ...