Winer vs. Phase II Systems
Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement
Motion type
Browse all Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Settlement rulings statewide →
Parties
Ruling
Agreement.” (Settlement § A(23) [the court will not approve this type of release].) • “PAGA Members may discover facts in addition to those they now know or believe to be true with respect to the subject matter of the Released Claims, but upon the Effective Date, PAGA Members shall be deemed to have, and by operation of the Settlement Approval shall have, fully, finally, and forever settled and released any and all of the Released Claims during the PAGA Period, without regard to the subsequent discovery or existence of such different or additional facts. PAGA Members agree not to sue or otherwise make a claim against any of the Released Parties that seeks recovery for any of the Released Claims during the PAGA Period.” (Settlement § B(3) [the court will not approve this language, especially injunctive language against the aggrieved employees].)
The parties must provide the court with a copy of the cover letter to be sent to the aggrieved employees explaining the claims in this action, the release of claims, and an explanation of the payment provided. The letter also must explain that no claims for unpaid or underpaid wages have settled, and that this settlement is without prejudice to the pursuit of any such claims.
Counsel should propose a realistic Final Report Hearing date and include it in the [Proposed] Order and Judgment, taking into account the time deadlines associated with funding the settlement, mailing distributions, allowing the check-cashing deadline to pass, and depositing uncashed check funds pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement. The court usually sets these hearings nine months after settlement approval if the check cashing deadline is 180 days. The parties must report to the court the total amount that was actually paid to the aggrieved employees. All supporting papers must be filed at least 16 days before the Final Report Hearing date.
Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling to the LWDA and Defendant.
7 30-2024-01428283 Plaintiff Christopher Winer’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Preliminary Winer vs. Phase II Approval of Class Action Settlement is GRANTED. However, Systems Plaintiff must provide the court with a new [Proposed] Order that identifies the correct judge, and all future filings should identify Hon. David A. Hoffer as the judge for this action.
A Final Approval Hearing is set for February 1, 2027 at 1:30 p.m. All papers in support of the Final Approval Hearing, including detailed hourly breakdowns of plaintiff’s attorneys to support a lodestar cross-check, detailed plaintiff attorney cost breakdowns, an Administrator declaration and invoice, and plaintiffs’ declarations to support the enhancement request, must be filed at least 16 calendar days before the Final Approval Hearing date to provide enough time for court review, and must be served in compliance with CCP notice of motion requirements.
Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling to Defendant.
8 30-2024-01390734 Plaintiffs Juliet Welton, Brandi Gregg, and Cindy Estrada Rosas’ Welton vs. Cerna (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) Motion for Preliminary Approval of Healthcare, LLC Class Action and PAGA Settlement is GRANTED.
A Final Approval Hearing is set for February 1, 2027 at 1:30 p.m. All papers in support of the Final Approval Hearing, including detailed hourly breakdowns of plaintiffs’ attorneys to support a lodestar cross-check, detailed plaintiff attorney cost breakdowns, an Administrator declaration and invoice, and plaintiffs’ declarations to support the enhancement request, must be filed at least 16 calendar days before the Final Approval Hearing date to provide enough time for court review, and must be served in compliance with CCP notice of motion requirements.
Plaintiffs are ordered to give notice of this ruling to the LWDA and Defendant.
9 30-2024-01439280 Counsel Jorge Ledezma of Ledezma Law, APLC’s (“Counsel”) Espina vs. J & E Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel for Defendant Edgar Estrada Hospitality Group Galindo (“Galindo”) is GRANTED. (CCP § 284(2).) Counsel Inc. has complied with the requirements of CRC Rule 3.1362. IT IS ORDERED THAT within five (5) days of this ruling, Counsel shall provide the court with a new [Proposed] Order that states that the next scheduled hearing is on October 20, 2026 at 9:00 A.M. for an Order to Show Cause why Defendants J&E, Taste, Sol Agave, and Prime’s Answer should not be stricken due to the fact that these defendants are corporations but do not have an attorney of record.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Notice of Entry of Order and Proof of Service must be filed by Counsel. Counsel remains counsel for Galindo until Proof of Service upon Galindo is filed.
7
Cited authorities
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?”