DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
2023-01309069·orange·ComplexCivil·Class Action & PAGA Settlement
Hearing 2 months agoGRANTED

Tran, et al. v. Byram Healthcare Centers, Inc.

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend Order and Judgment

Hearing date
Jun 25, 2026
Department
CX105
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Reconsideration rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$896,166.35$887,287.36$291,666.67$288,368.40

Parties

PlaintiffTran
DefendantByram Healthcare Centers, Inc.

Ruling

12

No earlier hearing date is available for this motion. 12 Tran, et al. v. Byram Healthcare Centers, Inc.

2023-01309069 Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend Order and Judgment Plaintiffs move to amend the February 26, 2026 order granting final approval of the class action and PAGA settlement in this case and the judgment thereon (ROA 195) (the “Order and Judgment”) because the settlement administrator discovered following entry of the Order and Judgment that the gross settlement amount calculated pursuant to the escalator clause in the settlement agreement is lower than previously stated, i.e., the Order and Judgment states the gross settlement amount is $896,166.35, but the settlement administrator subsequently discovered the gross settlement amount is $887,287.36. Castro Decl. (ROA 210) ¶ 15. (While plaintiffs style their motion as a “renewed” motion for final approval, review of the motion papers makes clear plaintiffs seek to amend the Order and Judgment.)

Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion to amend the Order and Judgment to modify the gross settlement amount stated at page 2 line 13 of the Order and Judgment is granted. Plaintiffs state that other than modifying the gross settlement amount, the Order and Judgment should otherwise remain unchanged.

To the contrary, as the gross settlement amount has decreased, the amount of attorneys’ fees awarded to Class Counsel should also decrease proportionally. The Order and Judgment awarded Class Counsel $291,666.67 in attorneys’ fees based on a gross settlement amount of $896,166.35 (i.e., 32.5% of $896,166.35). The Order and Judgment shall be amended to modify the amount of attorneys’ fees awarded to Class Counsel stated at page 2 line 16 to $288,368.40 (i.e., 32.5% of $887,287.36).

The court will issue an amended order and judgment consistent with the above ruling. Plaintiffs are ordered to give notice, including to the LWDA, and to file a proof of service. 13

Doe, et al. v. Thompson, et al.

2023-01370866 Attorney Raquel Y. Cooper’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiff John Doe 118 Attorney Raquel Y. Cooper moves to be relieved as counsel for plaintiff John Doe 118. The motion is denied.

The moving papers (ROA 1049, 1066) state the motion hearing is June 18, 2026 at 2:00 p.m. The hearing was continued to June 25, 2026 at 2:00 p.m. ROA 1086. The court file does not contain a proof of service reflecting notice to plaintiff John Doe 118 of the June 25, 2026 hearing date. This denial is without prejudice to counsel refiling a motion that complies with Rule 3.1362 in all respects. Attorney Raquel Y. Cooper to give notice. Motion to Seal Re: Plaintiff John Doe 118

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share