MICHAEL ESQUER VS GOLDEN STATE FOODS CORP
Case Summary
On 06/03/2016 MICHAEL ESQUER filed a Labor - Other Labor lawsuit against GOLDEN STATE FOODS CORP. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are WILLIAM F. HIGHBERGER, CAROLYN B. KUHL and CARL J. WEST. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Case Details
-
Case Number:
****2679
-
Filing Date:
06/03/2016
-
Case Status:
Pending - Other Pending
-
Court:
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
-
Courthouse:
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
-
County, State:
Los Angeles, California
Judge Details
Presiding Judges
WILLIAM F. HIGHBERGER
CAROLYN B. KUHL
CARL J. WEST
Party Details
Plaintiff and Petitioner
ESQUER MICHAEL
Defendants and Respondents
GOLDEN STATE FOODS CORP.
DOES 1 THROUGH 50
Attorney/Law Firm Details
Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney
SPIVAK LAW FIRM THE
Defendant and Respondent Attorneys
JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
JACKSON LEWIS PC
PC JACKSON LEWIS
Court Documents
6/28/2018: Other -
7/3/2018: Minute Order
8/2/2018: Notice of Entry of Judgment or Order
6/3/2016: COMPLAINT FOR: 1. FAILURE TO PAY EMPLOYEES FOR ALL 1IOU WORKED AT CORRECT RATES OF PAY (LAB.CODE ? 221, 1194, 1197, ND 1198); ETC
6/3/2016: SUMMONS
9/22/2016: Civil Deposit
10/7/2016: Stipulation
10/11/2016: Minute Order
10/12/2016: Order
12/7/2016: Status Report
1/25/2017: Order
2/1/2017: Notice of Entry of Judgment or Order
6/22/2017: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information
6/29/2017: Status Report
7/3/2017: Minute Order
7/21/2017: Notice of Entry of Judgment or Order
Docket Entries
- 08/02/2018
-
Notice of Entry of Judgment or Order
- 08/02/2018
-
Notice; Filed by Michael Esquer (Plaintiff)
- 07/03/2018
-
at 4:30 PM in Department 12, Carolyn B. Kuhl, Presiding; Non-Appearance Case Review (Non-Appearance (Case Review); Court makes order) -
- 07/03/2018
-
Minute Order
- 06/28/2018
-
Status Report; Filed by Michael Esquer (Plaintiff); Golden State Foods Corp. (Defendant)
- 06/28/2018
-
JOINT STATUS REPORT RE: ARBITRATION
- 07/21/2017
-
Notice of Entry of Judgment or Order -
- 07/12/2017
-
Notice; Filed by Michael Esquer (Plaintiff)
- 07/03/2017
-
at 09:00 AM in Department 309; Non-Appearance Case Review (Non-Appearance (Case Review); Court makes order) -
- 07/03/2017
-
Minute Order
- 08/09/2016
-
Minute Order MINUTES ENTERED 08/09/16
- 08/09/2016
-
Order; Filed by Court
- 08/09/2016
-
Order INITIAL STATUS CONFERENCE ORDER (COMPLEX LITIGATION PROGRAM)
- 08/01/2016
-
Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS
- 08/01/2016
-
Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Michael Esquer (Plaintiff)
- 07/14/2016
-
Summons; Filed by Michael Esquer (Plaintiff)
- 07/05/2016
-
First Amended Complaint; Filed by Michael Esquer (Plaintiff)
- 06/03/2016
-
Complaint; Filed by Michael Esquer (Plaintiff)
- 06/03/2016
-
COMPLAINT FOR: 1. FAILURE TO PAY EMPLOYEES FOR ALL 1IOU WORKED AT CORRECT RATES OF PAY (LAB.CODE 221, 1194, 1197, ND 1198); ETC
- 06/03/2016
-
SUMMONS
Tentative Rulings
Case Number: BC622679 Hearing Date: March 17, 2020 Dept: 12
Dept. 12 SSC
BC 622679
Esquer v. Golden State Foods Corp.
March 17, 2020
Motion for Approval of PAGA Settlement
Court’s Observations and Requirements:
(1) The following language of the release, “and includes in its effect all claims based on, arising out of, or related to the PAGA claim,” appears to include wage claims within its scope, which is improper.
(2) Is the time period for which claims are released consistent with the identification of the persons who are receiving payment?
(3) The amount to be paid to the named Plaintiff for his individual claims is not disclosed. The court requires this information to determine whether the PAGA settlement terms are reasonable and to make an effective public record of the terms of the settlement which this court is asked to approve.
(4) The payment checks to PAGA members should be accompanied by a letter advising them of the settlement terms.
(5) The DIR unpaid wages fund is no longer accepting funds from third parties. Another distribution of unclaimed funds must be specified.
Dig Deeper
Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases