FERREIRA, RITAJEAN v. FLYERS ENERGY

PLACER COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT THURSDAY, CIVIL LAW AND MOTION DEPARTMENT 3 THE HONORABLE MICHAEL W. JONES TENTATIVE RULINGS FOR AUGUST 27, 2026, AT 8:30 A.M.

Accordingly, plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration is denied.

Defendants’ request for sanctions is denied.

Motion for Relief

The motion for relief is dropped from calendar as no moving papers were filed with the court.

5. S-CV-0051131 FERREIRA, RITAJEAN v. FLYERS ENERGY

Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class and Representative Action Settlement and Provisional Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only

The unopposed motion is granted. The court has broad discretion in determining whether a class action settlement is (1) fair and reasonable, (2) the class notice is adequate, and (3) certification of the class is proper. (In re Cellphone Fee Termination Cases (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 1380, 1389.) Further, the court reviews the moving papers along with the entirety of the court file to determine that the settlement is genuine, meaningful, and consistent with the underlying purposes of the PAGA-related statute. (Labor Code section 2699(s); O’Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2016) 201 F.Supp.3d 1110.) The court must also determine whether the PAGA settlement appears fundamentally fair, reasonable, and adequate. (Ibid.)

The court has carefully reviewed and considered the Class and PAGA Settlement Agreement and plaintiff’s moving papers filed in connection with the motion. The court determines a sufficient showing has been made that the class action settlement is fair, reasonable, genuine, meaningful, and adequate. The court also determines the settlement is fair, reasonable, genuine, and consistent with the purpose of PAGA.

For the purposes of the settlement, the court hereby certifies the class as defined on page 3, paragraph 1.5 of the Class and PAGA Settlement. The court preliminarily approves the Class and PAGA Settlement and Class Notice. The court approves the proposed form of the notice, and incorporates by reference the findings and orders outlined in the proposed order lodged with the court on June 11, 2026.

The final approval hearing is set for Thursday, January 28, 2027, at 8:30 a.m. in Department 3.

PLACER SUPERIOR COURT – DEPARTMENT 3 Thursday Civil Law and Motion – Tentative Rulings

PLACER COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT THURSDAY, CIVIL LAW AND MOTION DEPARTMENT 3 THE HONORABLE MICHAEL W. JONES TENTATIVE RULINGS FOR AUGUST 27, 2026, AT 8:30 A.M.

6. S-CV-0051611 SUPREMA MEATS v. SALINAS FOOD

Defendants Feng Xiang Zhao AKA Tom Jau, Yin Chee Ting, and Great Golden River’s Motion for Summary Judgment

A motion for summary judgment must be filed and served at least 81 days before the time appointed for hearing. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (a)(2).) This timeline is increased by 2 court days where, as here, the motion was served by e-mail. (Ibid.; Code Civ. Proc., § 1010.6, subd. (a)(3)(B).)

The time appointed for hearing is August 27, 2026. Subtracting 81 days plus 2 court days creates a deadline to file and serve the motion for summary judgment by e-mail on or before June 4, 2026. However, defendants served their motion for summary judgment by e-mail on June 5, 2026. This is untimely.

Accordingly, defendants’ motion for summary judgment is denied.

7. S-CV-0052150 ZOLLER, KATHIE v. DONALD RYAN AND CAROLYN RYAN

Defendants’ Motion for Summary Adjudication on the Second Cause of Action for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress and on the Claim for Punitive Damages

Preliminary Matters

Plaintiffs’ objections are sustained in their entirety.

Defendants’ reply brief, along with objections to plaintiffs’ evidence and a responsive separate statement to plaintiffs’ additional material facts, are untimely filed and served without explanation. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (b)(4).) The court declines to consider these documents.

Ruling on Motion

Defendants move for summary adjudication as to the second cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress and prayer for punitive damages as to plaintiffs’ first amended complaint. A motion for summary adjudication requires a showing that there is no merit to one or more of the causes of action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (f)(1).) A motion for summary adjudication proceeds “in all procedural respects as a motion for summary judgment.” (Id. at § 437c, subd. (f)(2).)

PLACER SUPERIOR COURT – DEPARTMENT 3 Thursday Civil Law and Motion – Tentative Rulings