On August 31, 2018 a
Order - CHECKLIST FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
was filed
involving a dispute between
Patterson Jarvis,
and
Budget Wireless California Llc,
for Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)
in the District Court of Los Angeles County.
Preview
F
D
Superior Court of California
unty of Lo: s Angeles
L OS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT, COMPLEX Boke
Deputy
CHECKLIST FOR Berta Guerrero
PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
Department: 14
RE: Patterson v. Budget Wireless California, LLC (BC719426)
In reviewing your motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement, the Court Orders
further briefing on the items checked below.
The additional briefing shall be due by January 14, 2022. Note: if briefing is not filed by said date
the hearing will be placed off calendar. Your hearing date set for September 9, 2021, is continued to
the first available date of February 15, 2022, at 11:00 a.m. in Department 14.
The purpose of this checklist is to provide direction on what information and argument the court
requires to grant a motion for preliminary approval. The court urges the moving parties to carefully
review the checklist and fully comply with each item that applies to your case. The court requests
the content of the motion follow the same order as this checklist, since that is how the judge and
research attorney review the motion.
I. MOVING PAPERS (Motion and Declarations)
All facts submitted for the court to consider must be provided in the form of a declaration or other
admissible evidence. The court will not consider facts stated only in the motion.
A. Introductory Information
X Summary of the litigation, including identity of the parties, brief procedural history,
and claims asserted. Why did counsel only file the FAC adding a PAGA claim in July of
2021, when counsel submitted the PAGA Letter to the LWDA in August of 2018? Why
was there nearly a 3 year delay? Why is the filing proper?
CJ Miscellaneous Issues
B. Dunk/Kullar Analysis
LJ Summary of the investigation and discovery conducted, including the specific documents
reviewed prior to agreeing to settle the case. (Dunk v. Ford Motor Co. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th
1794, 1802, as modified Sept. 30, 1996 (Dunk).) If counsel’s analysis was informed by a data
mb sample, was it statistically significant?
Mee
LJ Summary of settlement negotiations, including when the settlement was reached, and
whether the parties were assisted by a mediator. (Dunk, supra, 48 Cal.App.4th at p. 1802.)
1
Rev. June 8, 2020
Document Filed Date
September 03, 2021
Case Filing Date
August 31, 2018
Category
Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)
Status
Stipulated Judgment - Before Trial 07/22/2022
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
F D Superior Court of California unty of Lo: s Angeles L OS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT, COMPLEX Boke Deputy CHECKLIST FOR Berta Guerrero PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT Department: 14 RE: Patterson v. Budget Wireless California, LLC (BC719426) In reviewing your motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement, the Court Orders further briefing on the items checked below. The additional briefing shall be due by January 14, 2022. Note: if briefing is not filed by said date the hearing will be placed off calendar. Your hearing date set for September 9, 2021, is continued to the first available date of February 15, 2022, at 11:00 a.m. in Department 14. The purpose of this checklist is to provide direction on what information and argument the court requires to grant a motion for preliminary approval. The court urges the moving parties to carefully review the checklist and fully comply with each item that applies to your case. The court requests the content of the motion follow the same order as this checklist, since that is how the judge and research attorney review the motion. I. MOVING PAPERS (Motion and Declarations) All facts submitted for the court to consider must be provided in the form of a declaration or other admissible evidence. The court will not consider facts stated only in the motion. A. Introductory Information X Summary of the litigation, including identity of the parties, brief procedural history, and claims asserted. Why did counsel only file the FAC adding a PAGA claim in July of 2021, when counsel submitted the PAGA Letter to the LWDA in August of 2018? Why was there nearly a 3 year delay? Why is the filing proper? CJ Miscellaneous Issues B. Dunk/Kullar Analysis LJ Summary of the investigation and discovery conducted, including the specific documents reviewed prior to agreeing to settle the case. (Dunk v. Ford Motor Co. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1794, 1802, as modified Sept. 30, 1996 (Dunk).) If counsel’s analysis was informed by a data mb sample, was it statistically significant? Mee LJ Summary of settlement negotiations, including when the settlement was reached, and whether the parties were assisted by a mediator. (Dunk, supra, 48 Cal.App.4th at p. 1802.) 1 Rev. June 8, 2020