On 03/21/2018 a Labor - Other Labor case was filed by PAULINA VEGA against JPMORGAN CHASE BANK NA in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California.
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
CAROLYN B. KUHL
DOES 1 TO 10
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK N.A.
DOES 1 TO 10 INCLUSIVE
7/3/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION OF A. GRODAN IN SUPPORT
7/3/2019: Memorandum of Points & Authorities
8/21/2019: Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT AND STIPULATION TO VACATE DATES
12/20/2018: Stipulation and Order - Stipulation and Order to Continue Trial
12/27/2018: Declaration - Declaration of Molly A. Desario in Support of Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.'s Motion to Compel Responses to Defendant's Requests for Production, Set One
12/27/2018: Opposition - Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.'s Opposition to Plaintiff Paulina Vega's Motion to Compel Further Responses to Plaintiff's Requests for Production of Documents No. 3
12/27/2018: Separate Statement - Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.'s Separate Statement in Opposition to Plaintiff Paulina Vega's Separate Statement in Support of Motion to Compel Further Responses to Plaintiff
11/30/2018: Separate Statement - Separate Statement in Support of Motion to Compel Defendant's Further Responses to Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents No. 3 [Cal. R. Ct. 3.1345]
12/3/2018: Declaration - Declaration of Alexander L. Grodan
12/3/2018: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion
8/22/2018: STIPULATION RE: BENCH TRIAL,ETC
8/27/2018: Minute Order -
8/13/2018: REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S BRIEF RE: RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL UNDER THE PRIVATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL ACT ("PAGA")
8/13/2018: DEFENDANT JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.'S BRIEF RE: RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL UNDER THE PRIVATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL ACT ("PAGA")
7/23/2018: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5/17/2018: DEFENDANT JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT
4/25/2018: Minute Order -
5/3/2018: NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Hearing11/12/2019 at 08:30 AM in Department 34 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: DismissalRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:35 AM in Department 34; Non-Jury Trial - Not Held - Vacated by CourtRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 09:00 AM in Department 34; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Vacated by CourtRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 34; Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery ResponsesRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 34; Order to Show Cause Re: (Dismissal) - Held - ContinuedRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 34; Hearing on Motion for Summary Adjudication - Not Held - Vacated by CourtRead MoreRead Less
DocketOrder ([Proposed] Order Re: Notice of Settlement and Stipulation to Vacate Dates); Filed by Paulina Vega (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketStipulation and Order (NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT AND STIPULATION TO VACATE DATES); Filed by Paulina Vega (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketMemorandum of Points & Authorities; Filed by JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
DocketNOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCERead MoreRead Less
DocketNOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCERead MoreRead Less
DocketNotice; Filed by Paulina Vega (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketNOTICE OF COURT RULING REGARDING NON-COMPLEX DETERMINATION AND ASSIGNMENTRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 00:00 AM in Department 12; (Order-Complex Determination; Case Determined to be non-Complex) -Read MoreRead Less
DocketMinute order entered: 2018-04-25 00:00:00; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute OrderRead MoreRead Less
DocketSUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
DocketPAGA COMPLAINT (1) CLAIM FOR CIVIL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF CALIFORNIA LABOR CODE, PURSUANT TO PAGA, 2698, E SEQ.Read MoreRead Less
DocketComplaint; Filed by Paulina Vega (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Case Number: BC698750 Hearing Date: December 04, 2019 Dept: 34
SUBJECT: Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement
Moving Party: Plaintiff Paulina Vega
Resp. Party: None
Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement is DENIED.
On March 21, 2018, Plaintiff Paulina Vega, as an aggrieved employee pursuant to the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”), on behalf of the State of California and other aggrieved employees, commenced this action against Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. for (1) civil penalties for violations of California Labor Code, pursuant to PAGA, section 2698, et seq.
Plaintiff alleges that she worked for Defendant as a non-exempt, hourly-paid employee, from approximately August 3, 2010 to November 29, 2017, at their various branch locations in Los Angeles County as a personal banker and lead teller. (Complaint, ¶ 6.) Plaintiff alleges that that she and other non-party Aggrieved Employees were not paid for all hours worked, at the proper rate, because all hours worked were not recorded, nor were they provided with meal and rest periods or overtime compensation. (Id. at ¶¶ 20-31.)
On October 25, 2019, Plaintiff filed the instant unopposed motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement.
There are both procedural and substantive problems with this motion for Preliminary Class Action Settlement. The procedural problem is sufficient to deny the motion. However, there are several substantive issues as well.
Procedurally, the complaint filed in this action is entitled “PAGA Complaint and lists one cause of action for “Penalties . . . Pursuant to PAGA §§ 2698, et sec.” In other words, this is not a class action. Therefore, the motion for preliminary approval of class settlement is denied.
Therefore, the Court need not decide whether the preliminary settlement is fair. Nonetheless, the Court is concerned as to the fairness of this settlement. As stated above, there is one cause of action for violation of the Labor Code. All of the claims which are being settled are Labor Code PAGA claims, including
· Off-the-Clock/Minimum Wage Claims
· Meal Period Claims
· Rest Period Claims
· Wage Statement Claims and
· Waiting-Time Penalties. (Motion, pp. 18:21-19:4.)
Therefore, at least at first glance, it appears that the LWDA should receive 75% of the settlement. The settlement is $5.9 million, yet the proposed settlement only awards the LWDA $187,500, or barely 2.6% of the settlement.
There may well be other issues of fairness to the 15,000 employees who might be covered by this PAGA action, but the Court need to address them at this time.