Document for ***MF***FLORES-V-WALMART (CLASS ACTION/COMPLEX) Print

• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP                                                        ELECTRONICALLY FILED (Autd)
     Robert J. Herrington (SBN 234417)                                             SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
     Matthew R. Gershman (SBN 253031)                                              COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDIND
     Alex Linhardt (SBN 303669)                                                    11/14/2023 2:58 PM
     1840 Century Park East, 19" Floor
     Los Angeles, CA 90067
     Telephone:     (310) 586-7700
     Facsimile:     (310) 586-7800
     Email: herringtonr@gtlaw.com
             linhardta@gtlaw.com

     Naomi G. Beer (admitted pro hac vice)
     1144 15th St., Suite 3300
10   Denver, CO 80202
     Telephone:   (303) 572-6500
11   Facsimile:  (303) 572-6540
12   Email: BeerN@gtlaw.com

13   Attorneys
             for Defendants Walmart Inc. and Wal-Mart Associates, Inc.
14                          SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
15
                                      FOR THE COUNTY      OF SAN BERNARDINO
16
17    MANUEL FLORES, on behalfof the                     CASE NO. CIVDS2023061
18    general public as private attorney general,        [consolidated with CIVSB2117018, CIVDS2023061]
19
                                                         Complex Case
20
                        Plaintiff,
                                                         Assigned to the Hon. David E. Driscoll
21    V.
                                                         Dept. S22—SBJC
22    WALMART           INC., a Delaware
                                                         WALMART’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION              TO
23    corporation, a California corporation and
                                                         VACATE JUDGMENT
      DOES |     through 50, inclusive,
24
                                                         Date: November 22, 2023
25                      Defendants.
                                                         Time: 8:30 a.m.
26    DEAN     WALTZ,      an individual, on behalf of   Place: Department S22
      himself and on behalf of all persons
27
      similarly situated,
28
                        Plaintiff,
29
30    V.

31    WAL-MART          ASSOCIATES, INC., et al.
32
                        Defendants.
33

                        WALMART’S       OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT
     ACTIVE 691396491
TABLE OF CONTENTS

             INTRODUCTION

     IL      FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

             A          The Hamilton/Hernandez, Carr/Wicker, and Rosas Actions

                         1     Hamilton I (Hamilton Class and Hernandez Class and PAGA)
                        2      Hamilton IT..
                               Carr/Wicker.
                        4      Rosas.......

                        The Settlement Approval Process in This Action.
10                      Objectors’ Counsel’s Prior Attempts to Interfere with Settlement of thi Case      10
11                      Judge Ortiz Overrules the Objections, Finally Approves the Settlement, and
                        Enters Final Judgment                                                             11
12                      After Judge Ortiz Enters the Final Judgment, the Deputy Clerk Mails Notice of
13                      Department $22’s Related Case Order                                               11
                        After Notice of Reassignment to this Department, the Failed Intervenors and
14                      Objectors Bring a Motion Before Department S22 Seeking to Vacate Judge
15                      Ortiz’s Judgment                                                                  11

16   Til.    THE COURT SHOULD DENY THE MOTION TO VACATE.                                                  12
17                      Movants Noticed Their Motion In The Wrong Department (S22).                       12
18                      The Motion Only Seeks Vacatur—Not Entry Of A Different Judgment—And
                        Thus Fails On Its Face.                                                           13
19                      The Motion Offers Nothing New That The Court Did Not Already Consider And
20                      Reject At The Final Settlement Approval Stage.                                    13
                        Chelsea Hamilton, Claudia Carr, And Lashawna Wicker Have No Standing To
21                      Move To Vacate The Judgment As Concerns Final Approval      Of The Class Action
22                      Settlement                                                                        18

23   IV.     CONCLUSION                                                                                   18
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33                                                          2
                         WALMART’S      OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT
     ACTIVE 691396491