Excerpt: ...revino for battery and negligence, which remain at issue. The parties reached a settlement of the class and PAGA claims, which the Court preliminarily approved in an order filed on October 7, 2022. The factual and procedural background of the action and the Court's analysis of the settlement and settlement class are set forth in that order. Before the Court is Plaintiffs motion for final approval of the settlement and for approval of her attorney...

Excerpt: ...ainst each of the Tributary Agencies, seeking declaratory relief.6 Trial is scheduled for April 10, 2023. On February 23, 2023, the Court issued an order denying the Tributary Agencies' motion for summary adjudication and granting in part separate motions for summary adjudication by Santa Clara and San Jose ("February Order").7 With respect to Plaintiffs' third cause of action for breach of mandatory duties underthe California Constituton as amen...

Excerpt: ...s unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion. l. BACKGROUND Plaintiff worked for Defendant in Santa Clara County as a construction worker and foreman assistant from 2014 to June 2021. (First Amended Class and Representative Action Complaint ("FAC"), '18.) He alleges that Defendant failed to pay employees for all hours worked, including overtime, by requiring them to work off-the-clock: for example, when undergoing COVID sc...

Excerpt: ...y Irrigation District ("8810"), Central Delta Water Agency ("CDWA"), South Delta Water Agency ("SDWA"), San Joaquin Tributaries Authority ("SJTA"), South San Joaquin Irrigation District ("SSJID"), Banta Carbona Irrigation District and Patterson Irrigation District ("BCID et the "Districts" or "Petitioners"); and (2) a motion to tax costs by the Board.l The factual and procedural background of this matter is summarized in more detail in the Court'...

Excerpt: ...revino for battery and negligence, which remain at issue. The parties reached a settlement of the class and PAGA claims, which the Court preliminarily approved in an order filed on October 7, 2022. The factual and procedural background of the action and the Court's analysis of the settlement and settlement class are set forth in that order. Before the Court is Plaintiffs motion for final approval of the settlement and for approval of her attorney...

Excerpt: ...s unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion. l. BACKGROUND Plaintiff worked for Defendant in Santa Clara County as a construction worker and foreman assistant from 2014 to June 2021. (First Amended Class and Representative Action Complaint ("FAC"), '18.) He alleges that Defendant failed to pay employees for all hours worked, including overtime, by requiring them to work off-the-clock: for example, when undergoing COVID sc...

Excerpt: ...ainst each of the Tributary Agencies, seeking declaratory relief.6 Trial is scheduled for April 10, 2023. On February 23, 2023, the Court issued an order denying the Tributary Agencies' motion for summary adjudication and granting in part separate motions for summary adjudication by Santa Clara and San Jose ("February Order").7 With respect to Plaintiffs' third cause of action for breach of mandatory duties underthe California Constituton as amen...

Excerpt: ...low, the Court is inclined to grant preliminary approval, subject to the parties' agreement (1) to amend the release to conform with Amaro v. Anaheim Arena Management, LLC (2021) 69 Cal.App.5th 521 (Amaro) and (2) to use a single definition for the entire proposed class. l. BACKGROUND Plaintiff worked for Defendant from November 24, 2014 to November 16, 2021, as a non-exempt employee in various positions. (First Amended Class and Representative A...

Excerpt: ...ion to compel arbitration, which Plaintiff opposes on several grounds. For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS Defendants' motion. l. BACKGROUND As alleged in the operative complaint,l Plaintiff worked for Defendants as a nonexempt employee from August 2017 to July 2021. (Class Action Complaint, '1 2.) Her duties included ordering supplies, assisting clients, and assisting medical staff. (Ibid.) Plaintiff alleges that Defendants failed ...

Excerpt: ...that Petitioner has not and cannot establish the requisite mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect required to obtain relief. For the reasons discussed below, the Court DENIES the petition. l. BACKGROUND Petitioner Juan Jose Balleza is the surviving brother of Adrian aalleza. Petitioner is a VTA employee himself and was on the phone with Adrian when he was killed. He suffered severe emotional shock and resulting injuries from what h...

Excerpt: ...ssed below, the Court DENIES the County's motion to strike and SUSTAINS both demurrers with leave to amend. l. BACKGROUND As alleged in the SAC, 63-year-old Lars Kepler Lane, together with 8 other coworkers, was killed in a mass shcm-ing per#trated by a fellow employee of VTA on May 26, 2021. (SAC, lla.) The shooting took place at VTA's Guadalupe Division facility which is located in the Civic Center of San Jose. (Ibid.) According to dispatch aud...

Excerpt: ...elate to two form interrogatories and one document request, all of which concern potential sub rosa survelliance (i.e., covert survelliance) by Defendants. Each side also seeks monetary sanctions against the other. After reviewing both sides' filings and the court file, the Court agrees with Plaintiff that photographs and films of surveillance are subject to discovery. (See generally Suezaki v. Superior Court (1962) 58 Cal.2d 166 (Suezaki).) Defe...

Excerpt: ...d into the Mach49 Operating Agreement (“Operating Agreement”). Yates became the CEO of Mach49 and Plaintiff negotiated for veto rights over any proposed sale of Mach49, any proposed issuance of additional Mach49 stock, and any proposed amendment to the Operating Agreement. The Operating Agreement incorporated Plaintiff's and Founding Defendants' ownership interests in the 10,000,000 shares of stock issued by the company in Exhibit B. Because ...

Excerpt: ...istributed by defendant Sanctuary Systems LLC (“Sanctuary”). (Id.) Between January 2020 and April 2020, Sanctuary, defendant 305 Consulting LLC (“305 Consulting”), defendant Behnam Pourdeyhimi (“Pourdeyhimi”), defendant Bryan Sigler (“Bryan”), and defendant Robert Sigler (“Robert”) made representations to Plaintiffs that: (1) Sanctuary was an industry leader in the design, manufacture, testing, and distribution of respiratory ...

Excerpt: ...quash the deposition of Srinithin Sundararajan or, alternatively, for a protective order. Cisco also seeks monetary sanctions against InESS and its counsel. InESS did not file an opposition to Cisco's motion.10 As discussed below, the Court GRANTS Cisco's motion to quash and GRANTS IN PART its motion for a protective order. It DENIES Cisco's request for monetary sanctions without prejudice. I. LEGAL STANDARDS A party served with a deposition noti...

Excerpt: ...opposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff worked for Defendant as a non- exempt employee from May 17, 2017 to March 1, 2021. (Complaint, ¶ 7.) He alleges that Defendant had a policy and practice of: (a) failing to pay employees minimum and/or overtime wages for time spent undergoing check in/out procedures, including COVID temperature checks and screenings; (b) failing to provide offduty 10-minute ...

Excerpt: ...n arbitration proceeding with the American Arbitration Association, but that proceeding was dismissed on September 1, 2021 due to MCM's failure to pay the initial arbitration fees while the parties finalized a settlement. On February 16, 2022, citing Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.98 (“Section 1281.98”),6 Plaintiff moved to “reinstate” the class claim in this action, deem the matter complex, and reassign it to Department 1. In an or...

Excerpt: ...tive class claims. Defendant also moves to compel arbitration of the PAGA claim, based on the United States Supreme Court's decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (2022) ___U.S.___ [142 S. Ct. 1906, 2022 U.S. LEXIS 2940] (Viking River). Plaintiff opposes Defendants' motion, arguing that Defendants waived any right to compel arbitration. For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS Defendants' motion in large part, but DENIES their...

Excerpt: ...AGA claim, based on the United States Supreme Court's decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (2022) ___U.S.___ [142 S. Ct. 1906, 2022 U.S. LEXIS 2940] (Viking River). Defendants seek dismissal of the representative PAGA claim. Plaintiff opposes Defendants' motion, urging that the parties' agreement here requires arbitration of the entire PAGA claim—including its representative component—and provides no basis to compel individual ar...

Excerpt: ...tion. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the operative complaint, Defendant is a construction company that operates throughout California, including in Santa Clara County. (First Amended Class and Representative Action Complaint (“FAC”), ¶ 7.) Plaintiff was hired by Defendant as a Cement Mason in April 2018, and continues to be employed by Defendant as an hourly, non-exempt employee. (Id., ¶ 6.) Plaintiff alleges that the wage statements provided ...

Excerpt: ...aintiff's individual claims, dismiss his putative class claims, and stay the representative portion of his PAGA claims. Plaintiff opposes Defendants' motion, urging that Defendants fail to show he consented to the arbitration agreements at issue and the agreements are unconscionable. For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS Defendants' motion in large part. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the operative complaint, Defendants are engaged in th...

Excerpt: ...led on October 24, 2022. The factual and procedural background of the action and the Court's analysis of the settlement and settlement class are set forth in that order. Before the Court is Plaintiffs' motion for final approval of the settlement and for approval of their attorney fees, costs, and service awards. Plaintiffs' motion is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS final approval, but with a reduced attorney fee award of $257,764....

Excerpt: ...r general negligence against Defendant. The Complaint has an exemplary damages attachment. The Complaint alleges that Defendant was negligent in maintaining the spa and pool in the common areas of the property, that the duty to maintain these areas was created and imposed by Defendant's governing documents (referred to as the “CC&Rs” and attached to the Complaint as exhibit A), and that Defendant's negligence in maintaining the spa and pool w...

Excerpt: ...tipulated order establishing a briefing schedule for Defendant's motion. Per that order, Plaintiff's opposition was due on January 12, 2023. Plaintiff did not file an opposition, and instead filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) naming Manuel Nieto as an additional class representative. The FAC was filed on January 30, 2023, without leave of Court or a stipulation by the parties. Defendant urges that this filing was untimely and unauthorize...

Excerpt: ...Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (2022) ___U.S.___ [142 S. Ct. 1906, 2022 U.S. LEXIS 2940] (Viking River). Plaintiff opposes the motion. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS Defendant's motion in part and DENIES it in part. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the complaint, Plaintiff worked for Defendant as a non-exempt, hourly employee from August 2016 through September 2018. (Representative Action Complaint, ¶ 10.) When Plaintiff and other employ...