Motion to Stay the Action
2026CUOE061822: LUIS ALMAZAN vs MAJCO LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 07/27/2026 in Department 44 Motion to Stay the Action
Department Rules. Parties and counsel shall follow the Department 44 rules and Zoom protocols, available at https://www2.ventura.courts.ca.gov/Courtroom/C44.
Remote Appearances. The Court allows Zoom appearances as a courtesy to parties and counsel. The Court does not accommodate Court Call appearances. You MUST register by 3:00 p.m. the court day before your hearing or you will be DENIED entry to the hearing:
ZOOM Registration Link:
https://ventura-courts-ca.zoom.us/meeting/register/iqN7uhQSQMuOqs-9TQXgEQ
No advance notice is required to appear in person.
Tentative Rulings. Oral argument should address the tentative decision. To submit on the tentative decision, email courtroom44@ventura.courts.ca.gov before 8:00 a.m. on the hearing date, copying all other parties, Use the subject line SUBMISSION ON TENTATIVE, [Case Number], [Case Title] and [Party]. If not all parties submit, the hearing will proceed, and the tentative ruling may change.
The Court may adopt, modify or reject the tentative ruling after hearing. The tentative ruling has no legal effect unless and until adopted by the Court.
Motion: Defendant Majco LLCs (Defendant) Motion to Stay the Action (Motion) Tentative Ruling: Defendant seeks to stay this action, which is related to four other pending lawsuits: Justin Poor v. MAJCO LLC, Case No. 2024CUOE032522, Ventura County Superior Court; Matthew Heintze v. MAJCO LLC, et al., Case No. 2024CUOE021584, Ventura County Superior Court; Ernesto Sanchez, et al. v. MAJCO LLC, Case No. 2025CUOE046568, Ventura County Superior Court; Eduardo Sanchez v. MAJCO, LLC, Case No. BCV-25-102146, Kern County Superior Court.
Defendant reached a global settlement on May 5, 2026 that necessarily encompasses the four-related cases that asserts class and representative PAGA claims, and the singular PAGA claim involved in this action. The global settlement will be the subject of a motion for preliminary approval in September 2026. Defendant seeks to stay this matter under Code of Civil Procedure section 597 and pursuant to the Courts inherent authority citing People v. Engram (2010) 50 Cal.4th 1131, 1146 [describing courts inherent authority and responsibility to fairly and efficiently administer judicial proceedings].)
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?”
Plaintiff filed a non-opposition to the Motion.
2026CUOE061822: LUIS ALMAZAN vs MAJCO LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
Having reviewed the papers, the Court finds that Code of Civil Procedure section 597 is not applicable given the different representative plaintiffs, and not withstanding the fact that the State in a PAGA case is the real party in interest. However, the Court exercises its discretion and inherent authority under Code of Civil Procedure section 128 to stay this case pending approval of settlement in the related matters.
The Motion is GRANTED.
The Court sets a status conference re: status of class and PAGA settlement in related actions on July 28, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. The parties are ordered to file a joint statement 10 days in advance of the status conference.
2