Excerpt: ...9, 2022 at 9am. CMO, § G(3)(a) (Declaration by Plaintiff's attorney) (i) ‐ Counsel estimates that there are 83 individuals in the class. However, there is no estimate of the number of aggrieved employees employed during the applicable PAGA period. (iv) – Counsel estimates the recovery by the average class member to be $1,816.87 (with the escalator clause), ranging from $30.11 to $7,488.45. (Spivak Dec., ¶ 16.) It is unclear how Counsel arri...

Excerpt: ...which Defendant is potentially liable. (Palencia Decl., ¶ 17(a)(ix).) There is no explanation regarding the likelihood that any violations would be proven to have been knowing and intentional. Nor does counsel set forth any facts to suggest that the imposition of the total amount of statutory penalties for which Defendant would likely be found liable at trial would be unjust, arbitrary or confiscatory, and there is no explanation as to how the a...

Excerpt: ...sider any order or for the renewal of a previous motion may be considered by any judge or court unless made according to this section.”) The cases cited by Defendant are inapplicable because they predate Le Francois v. Goel, apply to renewed motions (not motions for reconsideration), and/or only generally discuss the court's inherent power to reconsider its prior orders. Even if the court were to consider the merits – there was no applicable ...

Excerpt: ...e has been established to warrant the issuance of a protective order. It should be noted CVWD misstates the court's November 29, 2021 order. The court did not limit discovery to any topics. Rather, the court found that extra‐record evidence was permissible given that the remaining cases between the parties concerned whether CVWD's actions constituted a failure to comply with mandatory, ministerial duties prescribed by the Water Code. 2. CVRI200...

Excerpt: ... it is similar to Southern California Edison Company (SCE), which maintains “private corporate status.” (Automatic Sprinkler Corp. v. So. Cal. Edison (1989) 216 Cal.App.3d 627, 631.) Presuming there is a similarity to SCE, SCG is an IOU subject to legislative control, which “places it in a well‐known, separate category that is not included in the definition of public entity.” (Id. at 632; see also Moreland Investment Co. v. Sup. Ct. (19...

Excerpt: ...fails to cite to any authority that an employee's disclosure of the employer's violations of agency guidelines, procedures and/or protocols are sufficient to allege a claim under Labor Code § 1102.5. Title 8 § 338: Plaintiff concedes that “Title 8 § 338” is a mistake, and that he meant to cite Title 8 § 3380. (Opposition, p. 8.) However, he has not amended his complaint to correct this error. California Labor Code § 142.3: Plaintiff alle...

Excerpt: ...ettled law to require SWC's members to seek additional voter approval for the funding of the SWP and to further limit their authority to levy taxes to circumstances when all other potential revenue sources have been exhausted, without any valid legal authority for seeking such restrictions.” (Mot. p.7:25‐28.) SWC contends the instant action seeks to call into question the holding in Goodman v. County of Riverside (1983) 140 Cal.App.3d 900. In...

Excerpt: ...n claims that his performance was excused based on Plaintiff's breach of its duty to disclose under Sumitomo Bank of Calif. v. Iwasaki (1968) 70 Cal.2d 81, 84, Plaintiff has established that Rubin expressly waived this defense when he executed the Guaranty. (Evid. Packet, Dec.Lavian, ¶ 4, Ex. “C”, Guaranty § 2(h).) The Court previously found that Rubin (and Lander) had raised a triable issue of material fact as to whether Plaintiff owed a d...

Excerpt: ... a wrongful termination claim based on allegations that Defendant retaliated against her for complaining about wage and hour violations. Here, there is no same cause of action as the theories are different. This case deals with the failure to properly pay wages while the other deals with termination. There is no res judicata issues. Defendant then argues exclusive concurrent jurisdiction. For exclusive concurrent jurisdiction, as stated in Plant ...

Excerpt: ... NEMOURS AND COMPANY, THE CHEMOURS COMPANY Tentative Ruling: ANY REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT SHALL BE HEARD AT 9AM The Motion is GRANTED. Lack of Minimum Contacts Specially Appearing Defendants argue that the Court lacks personal jurisdiction over them. In general, a court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a defendant who is physically present in the forum state when served, who is domiciled in the forum state, who has made a general appearan...

Excerpt: ... action fail to allege that 3M's Corona facility caused Plaintiffs' injuries. Thus, the demurrer primarily turns on whether Plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged causation. “[A]s a general rule, the imposition of liability depends upon a showing by the plaintiff that his or her injuries were caused by the act of the defendant or by an instrumentality under the defendant's control.” (Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories (1980) 26 Cal. 3d 588, 597.) H...

Excerpt: ...ubstantial prejudice to the rights of the parties. (Avant! Corp. v. Superior Court (2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 876, 885; see also Keating v. Office of Thrift Supervision (9th Cir. 1995) 45 F.3d 322, 324.) While the Pacers court spoke generally of how “an objecting party is generally entitled to a stay of discovery in the civil action until disposition of the criminal matter” (Pacers, 163 Cal.App.3d 686, 790), the issue before the court was the depo...

Excerpt: ...t of a uniform under Labor Code § 2802 is a no different wrong than the failure to provide a uniform under Labor Code § 1198/Wage Order 5‐2001. When the employer reimburses an employee for the cost of a uniform, it “provides” the uniform because it is bearing the cost of the uniform. Conversely, when the employer fails to reimburse an employee for the cost of a uniform that the employee provided or purchased, the employer fails to provide...

Excerpt: ...roceeding until an arbitration is had in accordance with the order to arbitrate or until such earlier time as the court specifies. If an application has been made to a court of competent jurisdiction, whether in this State or not, for an order to arbitrate a controversy which is an issue involved in an action or proceeding pending before a court of this State and such application is undetermined, the court in which such action or proceeding is pe...

Excerpt: ...estion is one of a common or general interest, of many persons, or when the parties are numerous, and it is impracticable to bring them all before the court, one or more may sue or defend for the benefit of all.” “The party advocating class treatment must demonstrate the existence of an ascertainable and sufficiently numerous class, a well‐defined community of interest, and substantial benefits from certification that render proceeding as a...

Excerpt: ...ettlement agreement must be signed by the parties themselves; an attorney's signature is insufficient. (Levy v. Superior Court (1995) 10 Cal. 4th 578, 586.) The purpose of the statutory signed writing requirement is to provide unequivocal proof of the parties' intent to enter a biding settlement, which cannot be satisfied unless the signature is contained in “a document that was clearly intended by that party to be a binding settlement agreemen...

Excerpt: ...r #1 dated 3/29/19: 1.The motion is not accompanied by a declaration from defendant's attorney that complies with H.3.b of the CMO. 2. There is no declaration from defendant's counsel regarding the proposed cy pres recipient. The court also requires a further declaration from plaintiff's counsel regarding the benefit of using a Sacramento‐based cy pres, as opposed to depositing the uncashed checks with the State Controller in the name of the cl...

Excerpt: ...et its burden that it is an “arm of the Tribe” entitled to tribal immunity. Further MACT has not waived said immunity due to the terms of its contract with Medestar. “Pursuant to tribal immunity principles, an Indian tribe is subject to suit only where Congress has authorized or where the Tribe has waived its immunity by consenting to suit. Absent such authorization or consent, the courts do not have subject matter jurisdiction over suits a...

Excerpt: ...ing Motion Authorizing Sale of Property (Exhibit 11). (Evid. Code § 452(d).) The request for judicial notice is otherwise DENIED. Plaintiff's request for judicial notice is DENIED. The hearing is CONTINUED to 1/5/2022 at 9am to allow Plaintiff to submit supplemental declarations to address the Sumitomo defense and to allow Rubin to file a response thereto. Plaintiff's supplemental documents to be filed by 12/13/21 and Rubin's reply to be filed b...

Excerpt: ... wage claim, which may be derivative of the overtime and break premium claims. Additionally, the declaration provided little information concerning the PAGA claims as required by the CMO. The maximum and reduced PAGA estimates are significantly higher than the amount proposed by the Settlement, yet there is no discussion as to how the amount of the agreed‐upon penalties was calculated or why a greater amount would be unjust, arbitrary, oppressi...

Excerpt: .... The estimated number of aggrieved employees shall be stated as required by section G.3.a.i of the CMO. 2. There is no declaration of counsel's estimate of the recovery by the individual aggrieved employees under the PAGA settlement as required by section G.3.a.v of the CMO. 3. The motion fails to comply with section G.3.i of the CMO because there is no explanation of the factual basis for choosing a cy pres over the court's preference for redis...

Excerpt: ...rst objections are improper because they do not object to evidence but to the separate statement. Division's second objection is OVERRULED. All of the moving parties' objections are OVERRULED. MSJ Defendants argue that based on how many people are employed during harvest and the unpredictable nature of when said work is done, it is impossible to immediately pay employees at the end of harvest. It also argues that without notice, it would be impos...

Excerpt: ...App.3d 292, 300.) The running of the statute must appear “clearly and affirmatively” from the face of the complaint. It is not enough that the complaint might be time‐barred. (Committee for Green Foothills v. Santa Clara County Bd. of Supervisors (2010) 48 Cal.4th 32, 42.) The Right to Repair Act (SB 800) applies to “any action seeking recovery of damages arising out of, or related to deficiencies in, the residential construction, design,...

Excerpt: ...ain English that could be readily understood by caretakers with a high school education and appears to be drafted for attorneys. The Notice continues to include undefined terms that require reference to the Settlement Agreement and legal terms. For example, the Notice uses terms like nonexempt, PAGA, restitution, damages, certify (class certification), enhancement payment without definition or explanation. Although the Notice provides the release...

Excerpt: ...t for judicial notice in Reply are DENIED as to exhibits X‐GG. II. Standard “The fixing or refixing of rates for a public service is legislative, or at least quasi legislative.” (Kahn v. East Bay Mun. Util. Dist. (1974) 41 Cal.App.3d 397, 409.) “In general if an agency acts pursuant to legislative authority, review of the action is by ordinary mandamus” via CCP § 1085. (Shapell Industries, Inc. v. Governing Board (1991) 1 Cal.App.4th 2...