Tentative Ruling: **Complex-Class Action - PAGA** Worthy -V- Kuehne + Nagel Inc., etal Print

• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                Worthy v.      Kuehne      + Nagel,    Inc.  et al.                                         S
                                                                                                                             F
                                                                                                                                      N
                                                                                                            S AN          N
                           Clv5321 31 092                                                                       BERNAno:~%E'3?駔n?W°
                                                                                                                                    C
                            Demurrer or      Motion   to  Stay
                           Tentative    Ruling:


                            Request    for Judicial   Notice:


                                                for
                                    _(_3___ranted    Exb.  A   and   B.  Denied    for  Exb.   C- F On   relevance    grounds
                            (Superior Court      rulings   have   no   precedential     effect;  counsel’ s   brleflng   In other
                           cases    not  relevant).                                          r
                                                                                                                            '




                            Demurrer:

                                     Sustained     in part  and   overruled    in part.   The   parties   in the two   cases    are
                           identical   because the      state   is the  real party   in interest   i'n'a PAGA case,       not the
                           representative.       Nevertheless       the two   cases    do  not  overlap    entirely.   Unlike
                           Crossley,    this  case   includes    claims for penalties for meal         period    violations   and
                           failure to   reimbursed     business     expenses        Defendant’ s    view   of the   primary   right—
                           the  right to  be  employed      under    lawful  conditions—Is       too  broad.    Meal   period
                           violations    and  failure to   reimburse     business     expenses     involve   entirely different
                           facts  from   the  claims    asserted    In Crossley.     The   remaining     claims     however,    are
                           coextensive with       those   alleged    in Crossley.     Therefore,     the  demurrer     is sustained
                           as  to  allclaims    except the    claims for. penalties for      meal    period   violations   and
                           failure  to  reimburse     business    expenses.       The   demurrer     is overruled    with  respect
                           to the  claims for penalties for meal          period   violations   and   failure to   reimburse
                           business     expenses.

                        ,LEgMotIon   to Stay.

                                 ‘




                                   r

                                     The   same    reasoning     applies    to the  alternative    request to    stay the   action.
                            The   motion    is granted    as  to the  overlapping      claims    but d_enied    as  to the  non—
                            overlapping     claims    (those for penalties for meal         period   violations   and   failure to
                            reimburse     business     expenses).




                   Page 2 of 4
                   CV5260060922