Hermosillo et al v. Davey Tree Surgery Company et al

Filing 53

Order to File Supplemental Declarations Regarding Individual Settlement Payments. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 6/3/2021. (lhklc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/3/2021)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 JOSE DIAZ HERMOSILLO, OSCAR DIAZ HERMOSILLO, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, and on behalf of the general public, 12 13 Plaintiffs, 14 Case No. 18-CV-00393-LHK ORDER TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATIONS REGARDING INDIVIDUAL SETTLEMENT PAYMENTS v. 15 DAVEY TREE SURGERY COMPANY, et al., 16 17 Defendants. 18 19 Before the Court is the parties’ joint motion for approval of the Settlement Agreement that 20 the parties reached regarding Plaintiffs Jose Diaz Hermosillo and Oscar Diaz Hermosillo’s Private 21 Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) claims against Defendants Davey Tree Surgery Company and 22 The Davey Tree Expert Company. ECF No. 49;1 ECF No. 49-1, at 19 (“Settlement Agreement”). The Settlement Agreement calls for Named Plaintiffs Jose Diaz Hermosillo and Oscar Diaz 23 24 25 26 27 28 The parties’ joint motion for settlement approval contains a notice of motion paginated separately from the points and authorities in support of the motion. ECF No. 49, at iii. Civil Local Rule 7-2(b) provides that the notice of motion and points and authorities must be contained in one document with the same pagination. 1 1 Case No. 18-CV-00393-LHK ORDER TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATIONS REGARDING INDIVIDUAL SETTLEMENT PAYMENTS 1 Hermosillo (“Named Plaintiffs”) to each receive $30,000 individual settlement payments, for a 2 total of $60,000. Mot. at 1. In exchange for these individual settlement payments, Named 3 Plaintiffs will release their individual known and unknown claims against Defendants, rather than 4 just Named Plaintiffs’ PAGA claims. See Mot. at 2. The $60,000 in individual settlement 5 payments will be drawn from the $1,200,000 Gross Settlement Amount and will therefore reduce 6 the amount available to be awarded as PAGA penalties to the Aggrieved Employees. 7 Pursuant to California Labor Code § 2699(l)(2), the Court must review the Settlement Agreement to confirm that it is not “unjust, arbitrary and oppressive, or confiscatory.” Cal. Labor 9 Code § 2699(e)(2). Named Plaintiffs have only provided information justifying service awards 10 even though Named Plaintiffs claim that they are not seeking service awards. Named Plaintiffs 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 8 have not provided information in support of their requested $30,000 individual settlement 12 payments. The Court therefore has no basis to evaluate the requested individual settlement 13 payments. 14 Accordingly, by June 11, 2021, the parties must file declarations justifying the Named 15 Plaintiffs’ requested $30,000 individual settlement payments. 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 Dated: June 3, 2021 18 19 ______________________________________ LUCY H. KOH United States District Judge 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Case No. 18-CV-00393-LHK ORDER TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATIONS REGARDING INDIVIDUAL SETTLEMENT PAYMENTS

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?