Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Approval of Paga Settlement
3 Stewart vs. Irv’s Burgers LLC
2025-01493662
Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Approval of Paga Settlement
The motion for approval of PAGA settlement is CONTINUED to September 11, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. in Department CX101 to permit the parties to respond to the following items of concern. Any supplemental briefing shall be filed on or before September 1, 2026. If a revised settlement agreement and/or proposed notice is submitted, a redline version showing all changes, deletions and additions must be submitted as well. In addition, Plaintiff must provide proof of service of any revised settlement agreement and supplemental papers on the LWDA.
1. The settlement agreement contemplates the dismissal without prejudice of Plaintiff’s class claims. Has a request for dismissal of the class claims been filed?
2. Defendant turned over time and pay records for the aggrieved employees. Was this a sampling of records? If so, how large (e.g., 10%), and what steps were taken to ensure the sampling was representative?
3. Did counsel interview any employees other than Plaintiff?
4. Was an expert retained to assist in claim valuation? If so, please provide a CV.
5. Counsel’s valuation of the PAGA claim is inadequate for the Court to discharge its approval duties. “[A] trial court should evaluate a PAGA settlement to determine whether it is fair, reasonable, and adequate in view of PAGA’s purposes to remediate present labor law violations, deter future ones, and to maximize enforcement of state labor laws.” (Moniz v. Adecco USA, Inc. (2021) 72 Cal.App.5th 56, 77.) For each predicate Labor Code violation, please explain the theories of prosecution and defense, the evidence supporting those theories, and the likelihood of success. The Court cannot determine whether the settlement is fair without this information. (See ibid. (citing Kullar v. Foot Locker Retail, Inc. (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 116 and Dunk v. Ford Motor Co. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1794
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
6. Please provide contemporaneously made billing records for lodestar cross-check purposes, not simply a monthby-month listing of total hours worked.
7. Has Plaintiff separately settled his individual claims? If so, please provide a copy of the settlement agreement. The Court requires this information to evaluate the fairness of the PAGA settlement.
8. Does notice need to be given in any languages other than English?
4 Yang vs. Brandrep, LLC
2024-01415295
Plaintiff’s Motion to Enforce Settlement
There is no tentative ruling on Plaintiff Jenny Yang’s motion to enforce the parties’ settlement agreement. Among other things, the Court does not understand the need for an order to enforce a settlement that already is the subject of a judgement. (ROA 101, entered on April 2, 2026) Presumably, Plaintiff will be able to execute on the judgment if all payments are not made by the final funding date. At the hearing, the parties should be prepared to discuss the state of Defendant BrandRep, LLC’s finances, including (1) the likelihood of Defendant fully funding the settlement in time for the planned August 2026 distribution to class members and (2) the likelihood that Defendant will file for bankruptcy.
6 H.G. vs. Tustin Unified School District
2023-01365548
Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash Discovery Subpoena
Plaintiffs Jane Doe H.G. and Jane Doe K.G. move to quash or modify several subpoenas issued by defendant Tustin Unified School District (TUSD). The motion is GRANTED IN PART. The subpoenas will be modified as set forth below. Plaintiffs’ request for sanctions is DENIED.
GROUNDS FOR RULING
I. Brief Background
This is one of several related cases involving Siu Kong Sit, a former TUSD teacher who placed recording cameras in locker rooms and restrooms at Beckman High School to capture images of minors undressing. After the cameras were discovered by a TUSD employee in February 2023, Sit pleaded guilty to federal child pornography charges. He is now imprisoned.