arrow left
arrow right
  • TENESSHUA ADAMS VS PACIFIC VILLA, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL. Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction) document preview
  • TENESSHUA ADAMS VS PACIFIC VILLA, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL. Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction) document preview
						
                                

Preview

FILED Superior Court of California « County of Los Angeles ‘Benet RULING oct 27 2021 Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk of Court JUDGE KEVIN C. BRAZILE By Le fh Deputy DEPARTMENT 20 Hearing Date: Wednesday, October 27, 2021 Case Name: Adams v. Pacific Villa, Inc., et al. Case No.: 20STCV37260 Motion: Demurrer to Fourth Amended Complaint Moving Party Defendants Pacific Villa, Inc. (“Pacific Villa”), Glendora Grand, Inc. (“Glendora Grand”), Centinela Grand, Inc. (“Centinela Grand”), and Century Villa, Inc. (“Century Villa”) (collectively, “Defendants”) Responding Party: Plaintiffs Tenesshua Adams (“Adams”), Kimberly Garcia (“Garcia”), Maria Diaz (“Diaz”), and George Dussan (“Dussan”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) Notice: OK Ruling: The Demurrer to the Fourth Amended Complaint is OVERRULED. Defendants shall answer within 20 days. Defendants to give notice. If counsel do not submit on. the tentative, they are strongly encouraged to appear by LACourtConnect rather than. in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic. BACKGROUND On August 26, 2021, Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and all other aggrieved employees of Defendants, filed the operative Fourth Amended Complaint for violations of the Private tee Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA). we On September 27, 2021, Defendants filed this Demurre= to the Fourth Amended Complaint. ww wo On October 14, 2021, Plaintiffs filed an opposition. em On October 20, 2021, Defendants filed a reply. fe