By: Phillip J. Ebsworth and Natalie C. Kreeger
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Fourth Appellate District affirmed the trial court’s broad discretion to reduce PAGA civil penalties, holding that courts may use “any reasonable method” to reduce penalties and are not bound by any single calculation method — whether per pay period, per employee, or otherwise — and upheld the application of
Continue Reading PAGA Paraphrased – Taduran v. James R. Glidewell, Dental Ceramics, Inc.By: Phillip Ebsworth and Natalie Kreeger
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Second District reversed an order denying a motion to compel arbitration, holding that multiple onboarding documents reflected a valid and enforceable agreement to arbitrate individual employment and PAGA claims, and that a wholesale PAGA waiver did not defeat enforcement where it could be severed consistent with Viking River Cruises, Inc. v.
Continue Reading PAGA Paraphrased – Santana v. Studebaker Health Care CenterBy: Phillip J. Ebsworth and Sofya Perelshteyn
Seyfarth Synopsis: Second Appellate District affirmed the ruling in a PAGA bench trial finding that the employer’s pay plan was lawful and that the PAGA notice did not include the facts and theories that plaintiffs pursued at trial.
The bench trial focused on the pay plan by which the employer car dealership paid
Continue Reading PAGA Paraphrased – Mora v. C.E. Enterprises, Inc.
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Fifth District Court of Appeal reaffirmed its earlier holding in CRST Expedited, Inc. v. Superior Court that plaintiffs can bring “headless” PAGA actions—claims seeking civil penalties solely for Labor Code violations suffered by other employees.
In Galarsa v. Dolgen California, LLC, the Fifth District revisited the permissive language in the pre-reform version of PAGA. Specifically
Continue Reading PAGA Paraphrased – Galarsa v. Dolgen California, LLCBy: Phillip J. Ebsworth and Paul J. Leaf
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Fifth District Court of Appeal held that under pre-reform PAGA, headless PAGA actions in which plaintiffs seek civil penalties only on behalf of other employees and not for violations they personally experienced are permitted.
The Fifth District Court of Appeal considered the meaning of pre-reform PAGA language stating
Continue Reading PAGA Paraphrased – CRST Expedited, Inc. v. Super. Ct.By: Phillip J. Ebsworth and Jeff A. Nordlander
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Second District Court of Appeal held that, under the pre-reform PAGA statute, an individual employee need not have been employed or experienced a Labor Code violation during the one-year PAGA limitations period to have standing to assert a PAGA claim.
In Osuna, the plaintiff submitted a PAGA notice
Continue Reading PAGA Paraphrased – Osuna v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc.By Phillip J. Ebsworth and Clara L. Rademacher
Seyfarth Synopsis: The First District held that a prevailing defendant in a PAGA action may not recover litigation costs from the California Labor Workforce Development Agency when the LWDA did not participate in the litigation.
In Rose v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., a former employee at Hobby Lobby, filed a lawsuit
Continue Reading PAGA Paraphrased – Rose v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
Seyfarth Synopsis: PAGA claims brought under pre-reform PAGA must be brought within one year of a Labor Code violation experienced by the plaintiff and because a PAGA claim necessarily has both an individual and a non-individual component, failure to do so warrants dismissal.
The Second District affirmed the Superior Court’s dismissal of a PAGA claim where the PAGA notice and
Continue Reading PAGA Paraphrased – Williams v. Alacrity Solutions Group, Inc.Seyfarth Synopsis: The Fourth District held that a motion to compel arbitration is not the correct vehicle to challenge a plaintiff’s failure to plead the individual component of a PAGA claim affirming the Superior Court’s denial of a motion to compel arbitration as there was no individual component alleged to compel to arbitration.
The Fourth District reviewed a Superior Court
Continue Reading PAGA Paraphrased – Parra Rodriguez v. Packers Sanitation, Inc.
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Second District again held that issue preclusion barred plaintiff’s PAGA claim because he failed to establish any violation of the Labor Code and arbitral findings have a preclusive effect on a plaintiff’s standing in a stayed PAGA claim.
The Second District again grappled with the issue of whether an arbitrator’s previous adjudication of Labor Code violations
Continue Reading PAGA Paraphrased — Rodriguez v. Lawrence Equip., Inc.