Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/09/2019 at 00:03:06 (UTC).

CELIA ALEGRIA VS IN-N-OUT BURGERS ET AL

Case Summary

On 09/12/2016 CELIA ALEGRIA filed a Labor - Wrongful Termination lawsuit against IN-N-OUT BURGERS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are MICHAEL JOHNSON and JOSEPH R. KALIN. The case status is Other.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****3647

  • Filing Date:

    09/12/2016

  • Case Status:

    Other

  • Case Type:

    Labor - Wrongful Termination

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

MICHAEL JOHNSON

JOSEPH R. KALIN

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

ALEGRIA CELIA

Defendants and Respondents

DOES 1 THROUGH 20

GALVAN HUGO

IN-N-OUT BURGERS

BURGERS IN-N-OUT

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

EMPLOYEE JUSTICE LEGAL GROUP LLP

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

MCNAMEE ALLEN G.

LLAGUNO FERMIN H. ESQ.

KIBBE MICHAEL L.

 

Court Documents

NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT AND OF ORDER FOR PLAINITFF TO GIVE NOTICE

2/16/2018: NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT AND OF ORDER FOR PLAINITFF TO GIVE NOTICE

Minute Order

11/1/2018: Minute Order

Notice

11/6/2018: Notice

Minute Order

2/21/2019: Minute Order

Unknown

4/15/2019: Unknown

Request for Dismissal

5/29/2019: Request for Dismissal

SUMMONS

9/12/2016: SUMMONS

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR: 1. DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF GOV?T CODE ?L294O ET SEQ.; ETC

9/12/2016: COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR: 1. DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF GOV?T CODE ?L294O ET SEQ.; ETC

NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

9/15/2016: NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

DEFENDANTS IN-N-OUT BURGERS' AND HUGO GALVAN'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

11/15/2016: DEFENDANTS IN-N-OUT BURGERS' AND HUGO GALVAN'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

Unknown

11/22/2016: Unknown

Unknown

11/29/2016: Unknown

Unknown

11/30/2016: Unknown

Unknown

12/27/2016: Unknown

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER TO ARBITRATE AND STAY PROCEEDINGS

4/3/2017: JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER TO ARBITRATE AND STAY PROCEEDINGS

Unknown

4/4/2017: Unknown

Minute Order

4/4/2017: Minute Order

Minute Order

11/29/2017: Minute Order

13 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/29/2019
  • Request for Dismissal; Filed by Celia Alegria (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/25/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 56; Status Conference - Not Held - Rescheduled by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/15/2019
  • Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/21/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 56; Post-Arbitration Status Conference - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/21/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Post-Arbitration Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/14/2019
  • Notice (Defendants? Post Arbitration Status Conference Statement); Filed by In-N-Out Burgers (Defendant); Hugo Galvan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/06/2018
  • Notice (of Post Arbitration Conference, Final Status Conference and Trial Date)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/01/2018
  • at 08:31 AM in Department 56; Status Conference - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/01/2018
  • DECLARATION OF DAVID C. HOPPER IN SUPORT OF REQUEST FOR RELIEF DUE TO MISTAKE, INADVERTENCE AND/OR EXCLUSABLE NEGLECT UNER CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 473; Filed by Celia Alegria (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/01/2018
  • Minute Order ((Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
29 More Docket Entries
  • 11/29/2016
  • CIVIL DEPOSIT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/22/2016
  • CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/22/2016
  • Case Management Statement; Filed by In-N-Out Burgers (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/15/2016
  • DEFENDANTS IN-N-OUT BURGERS' AND HUGO GALVAN'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/15/2016
  • Answer; Filed by In-N-Out Burgers (Defendant); Hugo Galvan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2016
  • NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2016
  • Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/12/2016
  • COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR: 1. DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF GOV T CODE L294O ET SEQ.; ETC

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/12/2016
  • Complaint; Filed by Celia Alegria (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/12/2016
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC633647    Hearing Date: July 14, 2020    Dept: 56

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

CELIA ALEGRIA, etc.,

Plaintiff,

vs.

IN-N-OUT BURGERS, etc., et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO.: BC633647

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE:

PETITION TO CONFIRM CONTRACTUAL ARBITRATION AWARD

Date: July 14, 2020

Time: 8:30 a.m.

Dept. 56

MOVING PARTY: Defendant In-N-Out Burgers

The Court has considered the moving papers. No opposition papers were filed.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff’s complaint arises from her alleged wrongful termination as an employee of Defendant. Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendants alleging causes of action for: (1) discrimination in violation of California Government Code, Section 12940 et seq.; (2) harassment in violation of California Government Code, Section 12940 et seq.; (3) retaliation in violation of California Government Code, Section 12940 et seq.; (4) failure to prevent discrimination, harassment, and retaliation in violation of California Government Code, Section 12940(k); (5) failure to provide reasonable accommodations in violation of California Government Code, Section 12940 et seq.; (6) failure to engage in a good faith interactive process in violation of California Government Code, Section 12940 et seq.; (7) wrongful termination in violation of public policy; and (8) declaratory judgment.

On May 29, 2019, Plaintiff filed a request for dismissal with prejudice as to the entire action and all parties in the action. Dismissal was entered with prejudice on May 29, 2019.

On January 22, 2020, Defendant filed a petition to confirm contractual arbitration award. Defendant’s petition is premised on an agreement to arbitrate between Plaintiff and Defendant entered into on January 6, 2016. (Petition at Attachment 4(b).) According to the final arbitration award issued on April 22, 2019, the arbitrator found that Plaintiff: (1) failed to meet her burden to establish claims for discrimination, harassment, retaliation, failure to prevent this conduct, failure to accommodate or engage in the good faith interactive process, wrongful termination in violation of public policy, and declaratory relief; and (2) Plaintiff would take nothing for her claims. (Id. at Attachment 8(c).) The petition indicates that pursuant to the terms of the award neither party is to pay the other party any sum of money. (Id. at ¶ 8(b)(2).) Defendant requests that the Court confirm the award and enter judgment according to the award. (Id. at ¶ 10(a).)

On April 6, 2020, Plaintiff filed a notice of non-opposition to Defendant’s petition to confirm contractual arbitration award. In her notice of non-opposition, Plaintiff contends that she does not agree with the underlying arbitration award; however, Plaintiff indicates that she reserves all rights available to her under applicable law. (Notice of Non-Opposition at 1:24-2:4.)

This action was dismissed against Defendant on May 29, 2019 and a “voluntary unilateral dismissal is considered a termination in favor of the defendant in the underlying action.” (Villa v. Cole (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 1327, 1335.) Defendant’s petition was filed after this action was dismissed. If Defendant wishes to confirm contractual arbitration award—and Plaintiff does not oppose Defendant’s petition to confirm contractual arbitration award—Defendant should file a motion to set aside dismissal and then re-file its petition to confirm contractual arbitration award. (Caldwell v. Methodist Hospital (1994) 24 Cal.App.4th 1521.)

The Court therefore DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Defendant’s petition to confirm contractual arbitration award.

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

In consideration of the current COVID-19 pandemic situation, the Court strongly encourages that appearances on all proceedings, including this one, be made by CourtCall if the parties do not submit on the tentative.  If you instead intend to make an appearance in person at Court on this matter, you must send an email by 2 p.m. on the last Court day before the scheduled date of the hearing to SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.

Dated this 14th day of July 2020

Hon. Holly J. Fujie

Judge of the Superior Court

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer MCNAMEE ALLEN G.

Latest cases represented by Lawyer LLAGUNO FERMIN HUMBERTO