Preview
-_
ER
MARCL. JACUZZI, BAR.NO. 173220
SARAHE. LUCAS, BAR NO: 148713
KENDALL M. BURT ON, BAR NO..228720
SIMPSON, GARRITY, INNES & JACUZZI,
Professional: ‘Corporation
2175.N. California Blvd.,; Suite n0
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 322-8889:
Fax: (925) 322-8890
nn:
mijacuzzi@sgijlaw: com
slucas@sgijlaw.com
kburton ijlaw.com
AN
Mery Housing Management Group,:Inc,
Oo
and Mercy Housing; Inc:’
SS
Co
SUPERIOR COURTOF THE STATEOF CALIFORNIA
IV
FOR.THE
COUNTYOF ALAMEDA
12
13 LYNDONNA GAMEZ, individually, and di: ‘) CaséNo. RG21100185
behalf of other agerieved employees pursuant )
14 to the California Private: ‘Attorneys:General: ) HONORABLE JEFFREY BRAND,
})
Act; DEPT. 22
15
Plaintiff, Reservation No. R-2276196
16 )
V: ) ‘DECLARATION OF HEATHER
17 ) HALWIG RE: NO OPPOSITION
MERCY HOUSING MANAGEMENT ) RECEIVED TO MOTION TO STAY
18 ji.GROUP, INC., anunknown‘business: entity; ) ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF
MERCY HOUSING, INC:, an-unknown ) ‘PREVIOUSLY- FILED PAGA ACTION
19 business entity; and. DOES: 1 throagh 100; )
inclusive; )
20. ) Date: August 17, 2021
Defendants. ) Time: 2:30 p. m.
21 i ) Dept: 22
)
22 )
) Complaint-Filed: May 19, 2021
23 ) ‘TrialDate: ‘None Sét
24
25
26
a
27 %
28
”
S
{312$6-6300543522.D0CX:]}
DECI. ARA’ LION.OF HEATHER: HALWIG RE! ‘NO.OPPOSITION RECEIVED LO MOTION 10.ST‘AY,ACTION PENDING.
RE SOLUTION OF PREVIOUSLY. -FILED PAGA ACTION
—_
[,Heather Halwig, Declare:
LY
1. Lama paralegal — :at Simpson, Gartity, Innes:& Jacuzzi, Inc., attorneysof
YH
record in this action forDefendant Mercy Housing Management’ Group, Inc..and Mercy Housing,
FF
Inc. (Collectively “Defendants”), Ihave personal’ knowledge-of the matters set forth herein and, if
UM
calléd as a witness; I could and-would competently ‘testify
thereto.
AO
2.. On July 20, 2021, I served Plaintiff's counsel, Edwin Aiwazian of lawyers for
SN
Justice, PC, by‘U:S. Mail with Defendants’ moving papets in'support Of their Motion to.Stay this
eo
Action Pending Resolution of a Previously-Filed PAGA Action. A true aiid correct copyof the.
Co
Proof.of Service.signed by me showing service by U.S..Mail:on July 20, 2021 isattached hereto as
eet
OO
‘ExhibitA. Atno-point during this action has Plaintiffs’ counsel requested that they be sérved
—-
electronically. Nonetheless, on July21, 2021,.. sent.copies ofallof the moving papersin support
eet
of Defendants’ Motion to-Stay to Plaintiff's counsel via email. Attached hereto.as Exhibit.B is a
WY
| trueand correct copy.ofthe email thatI sentto Plaintiffs’ counsel onJuly. 21,2021 with the:
FB
moving:papers attached.
I declare under penalty of pérjury under the laws of the State.of California.that.the.
DH
foregoing.is true and.correct, Executed .this-9th day.of August 2021, at:Brentwood, California.
OR
ne aaa
ete: Halwig
DD
GBD
CS
DD
+}
NY
DN
YW
wD
FSF
AW
BY
KA
YB
Ty
NO
oo
NY
4
{31256-63
00543522, DOCX) } :2-
DECLARATION OF HEATHER:HALWIG.RE: NO ‘OPPOSITION RECEIVED TO MOTION TQ, STAY ACTION PEN DING
RESOLUTION OF PREVIOUSLY-FILED.PAGA ACTION
MARC L. JACUZZI; ‘BAR NO, 173220
SARAHE, LUCAS, BAR: NO. 148713
KENDALL M: BURTON, ‘BAR NO, 228720.
SIMPSON, GARRITY, INNES & JACUZZI
Professional
Corporation
2175'N.-California Bivd., Suite 710
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 322-8889
Fax: (925) 322: 8890 ~~
mjacuzzi@ssijlaw. corm
slucas@sgijlaw.coin .
' kburton@seijlaw.com
Attorieys for Defendants
Mercy Housing Management: Group, Inc.
and’ Mercy Housing; Inc. ©
SUPERIOR COURT .OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
FOR-THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA.
-LYNDONNA GAMEZ, individually,:and-on. ae Case No. RG21100185:
_ behalfof other agerieved: employees pursuant ?
14 to:the California Private Attomeys’ General" ) HONORBALE JEFF REY BRAND
Act; )’DEPT: 22
22
15 d.:
) Reservation No. R-2276196
d-
Ve, }
17. PROOF. OF SERVICE. RE:.
| MERCY HOUSIN' G MANAGEMENT: ‘) DEFENDANT’S MOTION ‘TO STAY’
18 . GROUP, INC.; an unknown’ businéss s entity; } ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF
.MERCY HOUSING, INC.;-an unknown. ~ ) PREVIOUSLY-FILED PAGA ACTION
19}, businéss entity;.and DOES. Ithrough 100, )
inclusive; ). Date: August 17, 2021
20 ) Time: 2:30 p. m.
Deferidants: ) Dept. 22.
21 )
Ceee
).
22 ) Coftiplaint Filed:.May 19, 2021,
)
23
24
25
26
27
"28
{31256-63
00542209.DOCXf }°
PROOF OF SERVICE
PROOF OF SERVICE
I,Heather Halwig, declare:
tN
I am employed in the city of Walnut Creek and County of Contra-Costa, California; 1 am over the
ow
age of 18 years and not a party to the within action; my business address is 2175 N. California
Blvd., Suite 710, Walnut Creek, California 94596. On the date setforth below, I served atrue and
mB
accurate copy of the document(s) entitled:
th
¢ DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO STAY ACTION
HD
PENDING RESOLUTION OF PREVIOUSLY FILED PAGA ACTION
e MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF
4’
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF
oo
PREVIOUSLY FILED PAGA ACTION
¢ DECLARATION OF MARC L. JACUZZI IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S
0
MOTION TO STAY ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF PREVIOUSLY
10
FILED PAGA ACTION
11 ¢ REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION
12 TO STAY ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF PREVIOUSLY FILED PAGA
ACTION
13 « [PROPOSED] ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY ACTION
14 PENDING RESOLUTION OF PREVIOUSLY FILED PAGA ACTION
15 on the party(ies) in thisaction by placing said copy(ies) in asealed envelope each addressed as
ollows: .
16 SERVICE LIST
17 Attorney for Plaintiff
18 Edwin Aiwazian, Esq,
Lawyers For Justice, PC
19 410 West Arden Avenue, Suite 203
Glendale, California 91203
20 (818) 265-1020
21 [By First Class Mail] I am readily familiar with my employer's practice for collecting and
processing documents formailing with theUnited States Postal Service. On the date listedherein,
22 following ordinary business practice,I served the within document(s) at my place ofbusiness, by
placing atrue copy thereof, enclosed in a sealed envelope, with postage thereon fullyprepaid, for
23 collection and mailing with the United States Postal Service where itwould bedeposited with the
United States Postal Service that same day in the ordinary course of business.
I declare under penalty of perjury thatthe foregoing is trueand correct and thatthisdeclaration
25 was executed this date atWalnut Creek, California.
26
Dated: July 20, 2021 4g, | .
27 dled dita beds AY _.
Heather Halwig i
28
(31256-63
00532209. DOCX
1 } o2-
PROOF OF SERVICE
Washington, Tai. _ _
From: Halwig, Heather
Sent: Wednesday; July 21,2021 2:58PM:
To: edwin@lfjpc.com
Ce: tucas, Sarah
Subject: Gamez.v. Mercy Housing
Attachments: POS -Def's, Motion To Stay Action:Pending Resolution ofPreviously Filed PAGA Action
(00542355x9CEC8).pdf; Decl,of MU ISO Def's-Motion To Stay Action
(00542260x9CEC8).pdf; Def's:Notice of Motion.and Motion To Stay Action
(00542246x9GEC8),pdf.MPA ISO. Def'sMotion To Stay. (00542245x9CEC8).pdf; Def's:
RFJN ISO Motion To:Stay Action (00542244x9CEC8). pdf;[Proposed] Order'on.Def's
‘Mation To Stay Action: (00542243x9CEC8) pdf .
Good afternoon.
On behalf ofSarah-Lucas, please see the attached. documents. Please note that ahard
copy will arrive via.U.S. Mail.
Best Regards,
Heather Halwig
Paralegal to Mare Jacuzzi,.Esq. and Sarah E. Lueds,-Esq.
Simpson Garrity lanés & Jaéuzzi PC.
2175. California Bivd., Suite 710
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Direct: 925.322.8889
‘MARGL. JACUZZE; BAR NO:: 173220
SARAHE: LUCAS; ‘BAR: NO.*148713 ;
“KENDALL M: BURTON: BAR NO. 228720 .
- SIMPSON; GARRITY, INNES & JACUZZI
, Professional
Corporation,he
2175 N, California Blvd., Suite 710
Walnut Creek; CA | 94596. “
, Telephone! 1925) 322- 8889:.
’ Fax:(925) 32278890 :
mijacuzzi@seijlaw. com”
‘slucas@sgijlaw.com ~
I kburton@sgi jlaw.com
Attorneys for Defendants:
Mercy Housitig Management Group; Tic.
rand: ‘Mercy Housing,*Inc.
/SUPERIOR GOURT-OF THE'STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Font Soni OF ALAMEDA:
“LYNDONNA GAMEZ, individually, 2and’on_. ) Case
{ No. RG21100185-
}-behalfof other ageticved employees ‘pursuant .).
‘tothe California’Private Attorneys General. yAHONORABLE JEFFREY, BRAND
|Act; ‘);yr
DEPT. 22°
).
Plaintiff, ) Resérvation No: R-2276196
ya
We ).DECLARATION.OF ‘MARC L:
i8|f
MERCY:
GROUP,
-HOUSING
INC.,-an
MANAGEMENT
unknown, business entity;
)D),
JACUZZI
DEFENDANTS’
ACTION.
IN SUPPORT
PENDING
MOTION
OF’
TO
RESOLUTION
STAY.
OF
‘MERCY. HOUSIN G; INC., an unknown: - ) PREVIOUSLY-FILED: PAGA ACTION
19 “business entity; and DOES: ‘| through 100, ):
“inclusive; , ).
20 ” ‘Date! August: 17; 2021
‘214
‘Defendants. iy Time: 2:30
2. Dept::22.
p.m.
2.
) '
) Complaint Filed:May” 19,2021.
331: ) +
‘24.
25]
26
27
28
(51256-63
00539601, DOCx
1}
DECLARATION OF MARC L, JACUZZI IN SUPPORT. OF. DEFENDAN?S’ MOTION TO STAY ‘ACTION
thet
I,Maite L., Jacuzzi,Declare:
WN
l. Taman attomey duly licensed to practice law before allof the courts of the State of
wB
California and am a shareholder of Simpson, Garrity, Innes.& Jacuzzi, Inc., attomeys of record in
FB
this actionfor Defendant Mercy Housing Management Group, Inc.(MHMG”) and Mercy
WNW
Housing, Inc. ("MHI") (collectively “Defendants”). I have personal knowledge ofthe matters set
DH
forth herein arid,if called as'a witness, I could.and would competently testifythereto. As tothose
NY
matters statedon information arid belief,| am informed and believe that they are-true.
wo
2, TFrepregent Defendant MHMG inthe putative wage and hour classaction entitled,
ow
Sherri Freeman v. Mercy Services Corp, Sacramento County Superior Court Case No. 34-2015-
BS
00184209-CU-OB. MHMG was erroneously sued as Mercy Services Corp. in thataction.
B&H
'PlaintiffSherri Freeman origitiallyalleged ten causes of action, but the Court sustained MHMG's
meee
HB
demurrer to two of those:causes of action. Freeman currently alleges the following claims against
HW
MUMG: () failureto pay oVertime inViolation of Labor Code section 510; (2)failure.to provide
BR
meal periods.in violation of Labor code section 512; (3) failure to-provide
rest periods as required
A
by the applicable Wage Order; (4) failure to payminimum wage for allhours worked inviolation.
A
of Labor Code sections 1194 and 1197; (5) failureto pay final wages in compliance with Labor
aU
Code sections:201.and 202; (6) violation-of the wage statement requirements in Labor Code
we
section 226(a); (7)failure to reimburse forbusiness expenses in violation of Labor Code sections:
Oo
2800 and 2802; and (8) violation of Business& Professions Code section 17200 ev.seg.The
SF
ON
Freeman action was brought by attomey Edwin Aiwazian of the Lawyers forJustice law firm.
&§
3. Lalso represent MHMG and its parent company, MHI, inthe action against them
YON
YD
entitled,Sekou Sowary, et al. v. Mercy Housing Management Group, etal., San Francisco
Ob
YD
Superior Court Case No. CGC-18-56894. The plaintiffsin Sowary-are represented by the same
SB
NY
A
N
'law firm, the Parris Law Firm, has since-associatedin as.co-counsel for plaintiffsin both actions.)
YM
A
The Sowary plaintiffsallege thatthey were “jointly and
severally” employed by MHMG and MHI
WY
NM
as non-exempt employeesin California. They seek civilpenalties under the Private Attorneys
ao
NY
(31256-63
00539601.DOCK1 ) Oo a OS ; -2-
DECLARATION OF MARC L. JAGUZZE INSUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY ACTION
ee
General Act of2004, Labor Code section 2698 efseq., on behalf ofthemselves and other alleged
NO
aggrieved former and current non-exempt employees ofMHMG and MHI based on allegations
WD
that Defendants violated the following provisionsof theLabor Cade: (1) Labor Code section 510
&
(failureto pay overtime), (2) Labor Code section 512 (failureto provide meal periods), (3)
WA
violation of the applicable Wage Orders (failureto provide restperiods), (4) Labor Code sections
DW
1194 and 1197 (failure topay minimum wages), (5) Labor Code sections 201 and 202 (timely
QQ
payment of finalwages); (6) Labor Code section 204 (timely payment of wages during
CO
employment); (7)Labor Code section 226(a) (wage statement); (8)Labor Code section 1174
Oo
(failureto keep complete and accurate payroll records); and (9)Labor Code section 2800 and 2802
thee
(failureto reimburse business expenses).
Oo
4, In or about June 2018, prior to the filingof the Sowary action, I received a copy of
a letterfrom Sowary’s attorneys, Lawyers for Justice,PC, to theLabor and Workforce
Development Agency (“LWDA”) regarding Sowary’s intention to seek penalties forviolations of
bee
=
the Labor Code on behalf of aggrieved employees against MHMG and MHI (“the Sowary PAGA
©,
letter”).A true and correct copy of the Sowary PAGA letter,dated June 4, 2018, is attached
©
hereto as Exhibit A.
5. In February 2019, MHMG and MHI filed a Petitionfor Coordination ofthe
ww
>
Freeman and Sowary actions, On or about July 16,2019, the Petition was granted and the two
©
actions were coordinated in Sacramento County Superior Court.
Dw
“o>
6. The partieshave engaged insubstantial discovery in the coordinated Freeman and
ce
DR
Sowary actions, including multiple setsof special interrogatories, form interrogatories,and
DQ
>
requests for production of documents, which also have resulted inlengthy meet and confer efforts.
Oo
HF
In response to the plaintiffs’document requests, Defendants have produced over 10,500
GO
NH
documents, The patties also have taken a combined totalof 23 depositions, including a two-day
EE
NE
deposition of MHMG’s “Person Most Knowledgeable” on amultitude oftopics relatingto,among
4
PO
other things, itswage and hour practices, including itsnon-exempt job positions, timekeeping
©
bP
policies and procedures, compensation policies and procedures, overtime policies,meal and rest
Ca
w
{31256-63
00539601.
DOCX 1} -3-
DECLARATION OF MARC L. JACUZZI IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY ACTION
period policies,payment of meal and réstperiod premiums, and business expense reimbursement
ON
policies. The plaintiffsin the Freeman action have filed a Motion for Class Certification which
ww
has been fully briefed and is scheduled tobe heard on October 26, 2021.
BP
7. In or about March 2021, I received a. copyof a letterfrom Lawyers for Justice,PC
A
on behalf ofLyndonna Gamez (“Gamez”) to the LWDA regarding Gamez’s intention toseek
ODO
penalties for violations of the Labor Code on behalf of aggrieved employees against MHMG and
NN
MHI (“the Gamez PAGA letter’).A true and correct copy of theGamez PAGA letter,dated
Oo
March 12,2021, is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
oO
8. 1 am informed and believe thatDefendants MHMG and MHI were served with the
10
Complaint filedby PlaintiffGamez in thisaction on June 18, 2021. [have compared the
11
Complaint inthis action with the Complaint filed inthe Sowary action and have found that, other
12
than the names of theparties, they are virtually identical.Like the plaintiffsin Sowary, Gamez
13
alleges that she was “jointlyand severally” employed by MHMG and MHI as a non-exempt
14
employee in California. Gamez seeks PAGA penalties on behalf of herself and other alleged
15
agerieved former and current non-exempt employees of MHMG and MHI based on the same
16
alleged violations of Labor Code provisions asserted by the plaintiffsin Sowary. The Complaint
17
also shows that Plaintiff Gamez isrepresented by Edwin Aiwazian of Lawyers for Justice,PC, the
18
same attorneys who represent the plaintiffsin the Freeman and Sowary actions.
19
Ideclare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California thatthe
20
foregoing istrue and correct. Executed this20" day of July, 2021, at Walnut reek, California.
21
22 GLE OT
MarcLacuzzi 4 fn!
23
24
25
26
27
28
(31256-63
00539601, ,DOCX
|}} -4-
DECLARATION OF MARC L. JACUZZI IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY ACTION
HOwDy f net hes
2|Page
Califomia Labor Code sections $10 and 1198 requiré employers topay time-and-a-half or double
time overtime wages, and make itunlawful towork employees forhours longer than eighthours
in one day and/or over fortyhours in one week without paying thepremium overtime rates at
one-
and-one-half times or double the regularrate of pay. During therelevant time period, Mr. Sowary
and other aggrieved employees worked in excess of 8 hours iin aday and 40 houts in a week.
Therefore, Mr. Sowary and other.aggrieved employees. were entitled.toreceive cerlain.
wages for
overtime compensation, but they were not paid for allovertime hours worked..
California Labor Code sections 226.7 and 512 require employers to pay an employee one
additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate for each meal or rest period that isnot
provided. During the relevant time period, Metcy required Mr. Sowary and other aggrieved
employees towork during meal and testperiods and failed tocompensate them properly fornon-
compliant meal and restperiods including, inter alia,shott,late,interrupted,and missed meal and
restperiods.
California Labor Code sections 201 and 202 provide that ifan employer discharges anemployee,
the wages eared and unpaid atthe time of discharge aredue aridpayable immediately, and if an
employee quits hisor her employment, hisor her wages shall become due and payable notlater
than seventy-two (72) hours thereafter,unless the employee has given.seventy-two (72) hours’
notice of hisor her intention to quit,in which case the employee isentitledto his or herwages at
the time of quitting. During: the relevant time period, Mercy failed to pay Mr, Sowary and other
aggrieved employees all wages due to them within any time period specified by California Labor
Cade sectioris 201and 202.
California Labor‘ Code section 204 requiresthat allwages eemed byany person inany employment
between the Istand the 15th days, inclusive,of any calendar month, other than those wages duc
upon termination ofan employee, are due and payable between the 16th and the 26th day of the
month during which the labor was performed, and that all wages eamed by any personin any
employment between the 16th and the lastday, inclusive,of any calendar month, other than those
wages duc upon termination of an employee, are due and payable between the Istand the 10thday
of thefollowing month. California Labor Code section 204 also requires thatallwages eamed for
labor inexcess ofthe normal work period shallbe paid no laterthan thepayday for thenext regular
payroll period. During the ielevant time period, Mercy failed to pay Mr. Sowary and other
aggrieved employees allwages due to them within any time period specifiedby CaliforniaLabor
Code section 204.
California Labor Code section 226 requires employers to make, keep and provide complete and
accurate itemized wage statements to theiremployees. During the relevant time period,Mercy did
not provide Mr. Sowary and other aggrieved employees with complete and acctirateitemized wage
statements, The wage statements they received from Mercy were inviolation of CaliforniaLabor
Code section 226(a). The violations include,but are not limitedto, the failuretoinclude the total
hours worked hy Mr. Sowary and.other aggrieved employees.
California Labor Code sections 551 and 552 require thatevery person employed in any occupation
of laboris entitledto one day’s restin a seven-day workweek, thatno employer oflabor shallcause
his employees towork move than sixdays in aworkweek, and thatan employer shallpay a civil
penalty in the amounts of fiftydollars ($50) for each aggrieved employee per pay period forthe
MH 000669
ANGE as Beery
4(Page
es a €
or: her
job. dutiesof
¢ in dinate consequence, of his or
¢rher obedience to the direétionsof the eraployer.
‘business-related’ expensesand costs that were not fullyreimbursed by Mercy: “These costs’ ‘nelude,
but arenot litnited
¢to,thelise of personal: phones for. business-related
matters, Costs.of business:
felated teavel,and the use of personal tools. ° .
thersiere, on behalf ofall aggriéved empldyées} ‘Mr.‘Sowary. seeks allapplicable penaltiesarising.
out of the above-referenced wage. ‘hour, and’ ‘payroll
practices,or which. “could be assessed’ and
colléctéd by the Labor and Workforce : Development Agency; forviolation of theCalifornia Labor
Code™ pursuant to AGA}: including ¢ anamount sufficient ‘to: recover’ ‘itidérpaid
wages pursuant to
Labor Code: section’558."
Tf you: ‘have’ ‘any
questions Ttequire. additional: information,
please: do not hesitate'tocontactiis:
‘Thank you for your attention to
this’ tmatter
and the noble:cause you advance each and’ everyday...
Ce: (By US, Ceitified Mail / Retain ReceiptRequested).
Mercy Services Corp
Mercy Hoiising, Inc:
‘Mezcy’ Housitig Management: Group; Inc.
‘cloMare L. "Jactizzi
’ .
‘Simpson,’ ‘Gartity;fnines:
& Jacuzzi, ‘PC
‘2175 N. California Bivd., Suite: 710°
Walnut ‘Creék, CA 94596.
ervey“Mall UndSepia CBr rig We Exjclosed):
455, Golden, Gate Avenile, 10th Floor,
San:Francisco; California 94102
MH 000671.
MH-:000672
iy { efi al
t ffs te
ae
‘ast 6: Wines MS ‘SwaNnaqs.
ebe AAS. “ANNAN. 3 ee LSaMno te
GOOG ODE eT. Ramee Fe v
|
PE peedSf
JUSTICE.
LAWYERS FOR
~ Mareh 12, 2021
BY ONLINE SUBMISSION
California Labor & Workforce Development Agency
PAGA filings@dir,ca. gov
Re: MERCY HOUSING MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC.; MERCY HOUSING,
INC.
Dear Representative:
We have been retained to represent LynDonna Gamez against Mercy Housing Management
Group, Inc., and Mercy Housing, Inc. (including any and allaffiliates,subsidieries,parents,
directors,officers,and einployees) (collectivelyreférred to as “Mercy Housing”) for violationsof
California wage-and-hour laws. Ms, Gamez seeks penalties for violationsof the CaliforniaLabor
Codec, which are recoverable under California Labor Code section 2698, etseq., theLabor Code
Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) and allother remedies available under PAGA.
Ms. Gamez seeks these remedies on behalf of the Stateof California and “aggrieved employees,”
as defined herein. This letteris sentin compliance with the reporting requirements of California
Labor Code section 2699.3.
Mercy Housing cmployed Ms. Gamez as an hourly-paid, non-exempt employee from
approximately June 2019 toapproximately March 2020, in the State ofCalifornia.
The “aggrieved employees” thatMs. Gamez may seek penalties on behalf of are allcurrent and
former hourly-paid or non-exempt employees who worked for any of the above-referenced
entitieswithin the State of California.
Based on the following factsand theories,Mercy Iousing has violated and/or continues to violate,
among other provisions ofthe California Labor Code and applicable wage law, California Labor
Code sections 201, 202, 203, 204,.226(a), 226.7, 510, 512(a), 551, 552, 1174(d), 1194, 1197,
T1974, 1198, 2800
Preview
-_ ER MARCL. JACUZZI, BAR.NO. 173220 SARAHE. LUCAS, BAR NO: 148713 KENDALL M. BURT ON, BAR NO..228720 SIMPSON, GARRITY, INNES & JACUZZI, Professional: ‘Corporation 2175.N. California Blvd.,; Suite n0 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: (925) 322-8889: Fax: (925) 322-8890 nn: mijacuzzi@sgijlaw: com slucas@sgijlaw.com kburton ijlaw.com AN Mery Housing Management Group,:Inc, Oo and Mercy Housing; Inc:’ SS Co SUPERIOR COURTOF THE STATEOF CALIFORNIA IV FOR.THE COUNTYOF ALAMEDA 12 13 LYNDONNA GAMEZ, individually, and di: ‘) CaséNo. RG21100185 behalf of other agerieved employees pursuant ) 14 to the California Private: ‘Attorneys:General: ) HONORABLE JEFFREY BRAND, }) Act; DEPT. 22 15 Plaintiff, Reservation No. R-2276196 16 ) V: ) ‘DECLARATION OF HEATHER 17 ) HALWIG RE: NO OPPOSITION MERCY HOUSING MANAGEMENT ) RECEIVED TO MOTION TO STAY 18 ji.GROUP, INC., anunknown‘business: entity; ) ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF MERCY HOUSING, INC:, an-unknown ) ‘PREVIOUSLY- FILED PAGA ACTION 19 business entity; and. DOES: 1 throagh 100; ) inclusive; ) 20. ) Date: August 17, 2021 Defendants. ) Time: 2:30 p. m. 21 i ) Dept: 22 ) 22 ) ) Complaint-Filed: May 19, 2021 23 ) ‘TrialDate: ‘None Sét 24 25 26 a 27 % 28 ” S {312$6-6300543522.D0CX:]} DECI. ARA’ LION.OF HEATHER: HALWIG RE! ‘NO.OPPOSITION RECEIVED LO MOTION 10.ST‘AY,ACTION PENDING. RE SOLUTION OF PREVIOUSLY. -FILED PAGA ACTION —_ [,Heather Halwig, Declare: LY 1. Lama paralegal — :at Simpson, Gartity, Innes:& Jacuzzi, Inc., attorneysof YH record in this action forDefendant Mercy Housing Management’ Group, Inc..and Mercy Housing, FF Inc. (Collectively “Defendants”), Ihave personal’ knowledge-of the matters set forth herein and, if UM calléd as a witness; I could and-would competently ‘testify thereto. AO 2.. On July 20, 2021, I served Plaintiff's counsel, Edwin Aiwazian of lawyers for SN Justice, PC, by‘U:S. Mail with Defendants’ moving papets in'support Of their Motion to.Stay this eo Action Pending Resolution of a Previously-Filed PAGA Action. A true aiid correct copyof the. Co Proof.of Service.signed by me showing service by U.S..Mail:on July 20, 2021 isattached hereto as eet OO ‘ExhibitA. Atno-point during this action has Plaintiffs’ counsel requested that they be sérved —- electronically. Nonetheless, on July21, 2021,.. sent.copies ofallof the moving papersin support eet of Defendants’ Motion to-Stay to Plaintiff's counsel via email. Attached hereto.as Exhibit.B is a WY | trueand correct copy.ofthe email thatI sentto Plaintiffs’ counsel onJuly. 21,2021 with the: FB moving:papers attached. I declare under penalty of pérjury under the laws of the State.of California.that.the. DH foregoing.is true and.correct, Executed .this-9th day.of August 2021, at:Brentwood, California. OR ne aaa ete: Halwig DD GBD CS DD +} NY DN YW wD FSF AW BY KA YB Ty NO oo NY 4 {31256-63 00543522, DOCX) } :2- DECLARATION OF HEATHER:HALWIG.RE: NO ‘OPPOSITION RECEIVED TO MOTION TQ, STAY ACTION PEN DING RESOLUTION OF PREVIOUSLY-FILED.PAGA ACTION MARC L. JACUZZI; ‘BAR NO, 173220 SARAHE, LUCAS, BAR: NO. 148713 KENDALL M: BURTON, ‘BAR NO, 228720. SIMPSON, GARRITY, INNES & JACUZZI Professional Corporation 2175'N.-California Bivd., Suite 710 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: (925) 322-8889 Fax: (925) 322: 8890 ~~ mjacuzzi@ssijlaw. corm slucas@sgijlaw.coin . ' kburton@seijlaw.com Attorieys for Defendants Mercy Housing Management: Group, Inc. and’ Mercy Housing; Inc. © SUPERIOR COURT .OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. FOR-THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA. -LYNDONNA GAMEZ, individually,:and-on. ae Case No. RG21100185: _ behalfof other agerieved: employees pursuant ? 14 to:the California Private Attomeys’ General" ) HONORBALE JEFF REY BRAND Act; )’DEPT: 22 22 15 d.: ) Reservation No. R-2276196 d- Ve, } 17. PROOF. OF SERVICE. RE:. | MERCY HOUSIN' G MANAGEMENT: ‘) DEFENDANT’S MOTION ‘TO STAY’ 18 . GROUP, INC.; an unknown’ businéss s entity; } ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF .MERCY HOUSING, INC.;-an unknown. ~ ) PREVIOUSLY-FILED PAGA ACTION 19}, businéss entity;.and DOES. Ithrough 100, ) inclusive; ). Date: August 17, 2021 20 ) Time: 2:30 p. m. Deferidants: ) Dept. 22. 21 ) Ceee ). 22 ) Coftiplaint Filed:.May 19, 2021, ) 23 24 25 26 27 "28 {31256-63 00542209.DOCXf }° PROOF OF SERVICE PROOF OF SERVICE I,Heather Halwig, declare: tN I am employed in the city of Walnut Creek and County of Contra-Costa, California; 1 am over the ow age of 18 years and not a party to the within action; my business address is 2175 N. California Blvd., Suite 710, Walnut Creek, California 94596. On the date setforth below, I served atrue and mB accurate copy of the document(s) entitled: th ¢ DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO STAY ACTION HD PENDING RESOLUTION OF PREVIOUSLY FILED PAGA ACTION e MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF 4’ DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF oo PREVIOUSLY FILED PAGA ACTION ¢ DECLARATION OF MARC L. JACUZZI IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S 0 MOTION TO STAY ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF PREVIOUSLY 10 FILED PAGA ACTION 11 ¢ REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION 12 TO STAY ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF PREVIOUSLY FILED PAGA ACTION 13 « [PROPOSED] ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY ACTION 14 PENDING RESOLUTION OF PREVIOUSLY FILED PAGA ACTION 15 on the party(ies) in thisaction by placing said copy(ies) in asealed envelope each addressed as ollows: . 16 SERVICE LIST 17 Attorney for Plaintiff 18 Edwin Aiwazian, Esq, Lawyers For Justice, PC 19 410 West Arden Avenue, Suite 203 Glendale, California 91203 20 (818) 265-1020 21 [By First Class Mail] I am readily familiar with my employer's practice for collecting and processing documents formailing with theUnited States Postal Service. On the date listedherein, 22 following ordinary business practice,I served the within document(s) at my place ofbusiness, by placing atrue copy thereof, enclosed in a sealed envelope, with postage thereon fullyprepaid, for 23 collection and mailing with the United States Postal Service where itwould bedeposited with the United States Postal Service that same day in the ordinary course of business. I declare under penalty of perjury thatthe foregoing is trueand correct and thatthisdeclaration 25 was executed this date atWalnut Creek, California. 26 Dated: July 20, 2021 4g, | . 27 dled dita beds AY _. Heather Halwig i 28 (31256-63 00532209. DOCX 1 } o2- PROOF OF SERVICE Washington, Tai. _ _ From: Halwig, Heather Sent: Wednesday; July 21,2021 2:58PM: To: edwin@lfjpc.com Ce: tucas, Sarah Subject: Gamez.v. Mercy Housing Attachments: POS -Def's, Motion To Stay Action:Pending Resolution ofPreviously Filed PAGA Action (00542355x9CEC8).pdf; Decl,of MU ISO Def's-Motion To Stay Action (00542260x9CEC8).pdf; Def's:Notice of Motion.and Motion To Stay Action (00542246x9GEC8),pdf.MPA ISO. Def'sMotion To Stay. (00542245x9CEC8).pdf; Def's: RFJN ISO Motion To:Stay Action (00542244x9CEC8). pdf;[Proposed] Order'on.Def's ‘Mation To Stay Action: (00542243x9CEC8) pdf . Good afternoon. On behalf ofSarah-Lucas, please see the attached. documents. Please note that ahard copy will arrive via.U.S. Mail. Best Regards, Heather Halwig Paralegal to Mare Jacuzzi,.Esq. and Sarah E. Lueds,-Esq. Simpson Garrity lanés & Jaéuzzi PC. 2175. California Bivd., Suite 710 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Direct: 925.322.8889 ‘MARGL. JACUZZE; BAR NO:: 173220 SARAHE: LUCAS; ‘BAR: NO.*148713 ; “KENDALL M: BURTON: BAR NO. 228720 . - SIMPSON; GARRITY, INNES & JACUZZI , Professional Corporation,he 2175 N, California Blvd., Suite 710 Walnut Creek; CA | 94596. “ , Telephone! 1925) 322- 8889:. ’ Fax:(925) 32278890 : mijacuzzi@seijlaw. com” ‘slucas@sgijlaw.com ~ I kburton@sgi jlaw.com Attorneys for Defendants: Mercy Housitig Management Group; Tic. rand: ‘Mercy Housing,*Inc. /SUPERIOR GOURT-OF THE'STATE OF CALIFORNIA Font Soni OF ALAMEDA: “LYNDONNA GAMEZ, individually, 2and’on_. ) Case { No. RG21100185- }-behalfof other ageticved employees ‘pursuant .). ‘tothe California’Private Attorneys General. yAHONORABLE JEFFREY, BRAND |Act; ‘);yr DEPT. 22° ). Plaintiff, ) Resérvation No: R-2276196 ya We ).DECLARATION.OF ‘MARC L: i8|f MERCY: GROUP, -HOUSING INC.,-an MANAGEMENT unknown, business entity; )D), JACUZZI DEFENDANTS’ ACTION. IN SUPPORT PENDING MOTION OF’ TO RESOLUTION STAY. OF ‘MERCY. HOUSIN G; INC., an unknown: - ) PREVIOUSLY-FILED: PAGA ACTION 19 “business entity; and DOES: ‘| through 100, ): “inclusive; , ). 20 ” ‘Date! August: 17; 2021 ‘214 ‘Defendants. iy Time: 2:30 2. Dept::22. p.m. 2. ) ' ) Complaint Filed:May” 19,2021. 331: ) + ‘24. 25] 26 27 28 (51256-63 00539601, DOCx 1} DECLARATION OF MARC L, JACUZZI IN SUPPORT. OF. DEFENDAN?S’ MOTION TO STAY ‘ACTION thet I,Maite L., Jacuzzi,Declare: WN l. Taman attomey duly licensed to practice law before allof the courts of the State of wB California and am a shareholder of Simpson, Garrity, Innes.& Jacuzzi, Inc., attomeys of record in FB this actionfor Defendant Mercy Housing Management Group, Inc.(MHMG”) and Mercy WNW Housing, Inc. ("MHI") (collectively “Defendants”). I have personal knowledge ofthe matters set DH forth herein arid,if called as'a witness, I could.and would competently testifythereto. As tothose NY matters statedon information arid belief,| am informed and believe that they are-true. wo 2, TFrepregent Defendant MHMG inthe putative wage and hour classaction entitled, ow Sherri Freeman v. Mercy Services Corp, Sacramento County Superior Court Case No. 34-2015- BS 00184209-CU-OB. MHMG was erroneously sued as Mercy Services Corp. in thataction. B&H 'PlaintiffSherri Freeman origitiallyalleged ten causes of action, but the Court sustained MHMG's meee HB demurrer to two of those:causes of action. Freeman currently alleges the following claims against HW MUMG: () failureto pay oVertime inViolation of Labor Code section 510; (2)failure.to provide BR meal periods.in violation of Labor code section 512; (3) failure to-provide rest periods as required A by the applicable Wage Order; (4) failure to payminimum wage for allhours worked inviolation. A of Labor Code sections 1194 and 1197; (5) failureto pay final wages in compliance with Labor aU Code sections:201.and 202; (6) violation-of the wage statement requirements in Labor Code we section 226(a); (7)failure to reimburse forbusiness expenses in violation of Labor Code sections: Oo 2800 and 2802; and (8) violation of Business& Professions Code section 17200 ev.seg.The SF ON Freeman action was brought by attomey Edwin Aiwazian of the Lawyers forJustice law firm. &§ 3. Lalso represent MHMG and its parent company, MHI, inthe action against them YON YD entitled,Sekou Sowary, et al. v. Mercy Housing Management Group, etal., San Francisco Ob YD Superior Court Case No. CGC-18-56894. The plaintiffsin Sowary-are represented by the same SB NY A N 'law firm, the Parris Law Firm, has since-associatedin as.co-counsel for plaintiffsin both actions.) YM A The Sowary plaintiffsallege thatthey were “jointly and severally” employed by MHMG and MHI WY NM as non-exempt employeesin California. They seek civilpenalties under the Private Attorneys ao NY (31256-63 00539601.DOCK1 ) Oo a OS ; -2- DECLARATION OF MARC L. JAGUZZE INSUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY ACTION ee General Act of2004, Labor Code section 2698 efseq., on behalf ofthemselves and other alleged NO aggrieved former and current non-exempt employees ofMHMG and MHI based on allegations WD that Defendants violated the following provisionsof theLabor Cade: (1) Labor Code section 510 & (failureto pay overtime), (2) Labor Code section 512 (failureto provide meal periods), (3) WA violation of the applicable Wage Orders (failureto provide restperiods), (4) Labor Code sections DW 1194 and 1197 (failure topay minimum wages), (5) Labor Code sections 201 and 202 (timely QQ payment of finalwages); (6) Labor Code section 204 (timely payment of wages during CO employment); (7)Labor Code section 226(a) (wage statement); (8)Labor Code section 1174 Oo (failureto keep complete and accurate payroll records); and (9)Labor Code section 2800 and 2802 thee (failureto reimburse business expenses). Oo 4, In or about June 2018, prior to the filingof the Sowary action, I received a copy of a letterfrom Sowary’s attorneys, Lawyers for Justice,PC, to theLabor and Workforce Development Agency (“LWDA”) regarding Sowary’s intention to seek penalties forviolations of bee = the Labor Code on behalf of aggrieved employees against MHMG and MHI (“the Sowary PAGA ©, letter”).A true and correct copy of the Sowary PAGA letter,dated June 4, 2018, is attached © hereto as Exhibit A. 5. In February 2019, MHMG and MHI filed a Petitionfor Coordination ofthe ww > Freeman and Sowary actions, On or about July 16,2019, the Petition was granted and the two © actions were coordinated in Sacramento County Superior Court. Dw “o> 6. The partieshave engaged insubstantial discovery in the coordinated Freeman and ce DR Sowary actions, including multiple setsof special interrogatories, form interrogatories,and DQ > requests for production of documents, which also have resulted inlengthy meet and confer efforts. Oo HF In response to the plaintiffs’document requests, Defendants have produced over 10,500 GO NH documents, The patties also have taken a combined totalof 23 depositions, including a two-day EE NE deposition of MHMG’s “Person Most Knowledgeable” on amultitude oftopics relatingto,among 4 PO other things, itswage and hour practices, including itsnon-exempt job positions, timekeeping © bP policies and procedures, compensation policies and procedures, overtime policies,meal and rest Ca w {31256-63 00539601. DOCX 1} -3- DECLARATION OF MARC L. JACUZZI IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY ACTION period policies,payment of meal and réstperiod premiums, and business expense reimbursement ON policies. The plaintiffsin the Freeman action have filed a Motion for Class Certification which ww has been fully briefed and is scheduled tobe heard on October 26, 2021. BP 7. In or about March 2021, I received a. copyof a letterfrom Lawyers for Justice,PC A on behalf ofLyndonna Gamez (“Gamez”) to the LWDA regarding Gamez’s intention toseek ODO penalties for violations of the Labor Code on behalf of aggrieved employees against MHMG and NN MHI (“the Gamez PAGA letter’).A true and correct copy of theGamez PAGA letter,dated Oo March 12,2021, is attached hereto as Exhibit B. oO 8. 1 am informed and believe thatDefendants MHMG and MHI were served with the 10 Complaint filedby PlaintiffGamez in thisaction on June 18, 2021. [have compared the 11 Complaint inthis action with the Complaint filed inthe Sowary action and have found that, other 12 than the names of theparties, they are virtually identical.Like the plaintiffsin Sowary, Gamez 13 alleges that she was “jointlyand severally” employed by MHMG and MHI as a non-exempt 14 employee in California. Gamez seeks PAGA penalties on behalf of herself and other alleged 15 agerieved former and current non-exempt employees of MHMG and MHI based on the same 16 alleged violations of Labor Code provisions asserted by the plaintiffsin Sowary. The Complaint 17 also shows that Plaintiff Gamez isrepresented by Edwin Aiwazian of Lawyers for Justice,PC, the 18 same attorneys who represent the plaintiffsin the Freeman and Sowary actions. 19 Ideclare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California thatthe 20 foregoing istrue and correct. Executed this20" day of July, 2021, at Walnut reek, California. 21 22 GLE OT MarcLacuzzi 4 fn! 23 24 25 26 27 28 (31256-63 00539601, ,DOCX |}} -4- DECLARATION OF MARC L. JACUZZI IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY ACTION HOwDy f net hes 2|Page Califomia Labor Code sections $10 and 1198 requiré employers topay time-and-a-half or double time overtime wages, and make itunlawful towork employees forhours longer than eighthours in one day and/or over fortyhours in one week without paying thepremium overtime rates at one- and-one-half times or double the regularrate of pay. During therelevant time period, Mr. Sowary and other aggrieved employees worked in excess of 8 hours iin aday and 40 houts in a week. Therefore, Mr. Sowary and other.aggrieved employees. were entitled.toreceive cerlain. wages for overtime compensation, but they were not paid for allovertime hours worked.. California Labor Code sections 226.7 and 512 require employers to pay an employee one additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate for each meal or rest period that isnot provided. During the relevant time period, Metcy required Mr. Sowary and other aggrieved employees towork during meal and testperiods and failed tocompensate them properly fornon- compliant meal and restperiods including, inter alia,shott,late,interrupted,and missed meal and restperiods. California Labor Code sections 201 and 202 provide that ifan employer discharges anemployee, the wages eared and unpaid atthe time of discharge aredue aridpayable immediately, and if an employee quits hisor her employment, hisor her wages shall become due and payable notlater than seventy-two (72) hours thereafter,unless the employee has given.seventy-two (72) hours’ notice of hisor her intention to quit,in which case the employee isentitledto his or herwages at the time of quitting. During: the relevant time period, Mercy failed to pay Mr, Sowary and other aggrieved employees all wages due to them within any time period specified by California Labor Cade sectioris 201and 202. California Labor‘ Code section 204 requiresthat allwages eemed byany person inany employment between the Istand the 15th days, inclusive,of any calendar month, other than those wages duc upon termination ofan employee, are due and payable between the 16th and the 26th day of the month during which the labor was performed, and that all wages eamed by any personin any employment between the 16th and the lastday, inclusive,of any calendar month, other than those wages duc upon termination of an employee, are due and payable between the Istand the 10thday of thefollowing month. California Labor Code section 204 also requires thatallwages eamed for labor inexcess ofthe normal work period shallbe paid no laterthan thepayday for thenext regular payroll period. During the ielevant time period, Mercy failed to pay Mr. Sowary and other aggrieved employees allwages due to them within any time period specifiedby CaliforniaLabor Code section 204. California Labor Code section 226 requires employers to make, keep and provide complete and accurate itemized wage statements to theiremployees. During the relevant time period,Mercy did not provide Mr. Sowary and other aggrieved employees with complete and acctirateitemized wage statements, The wage statements they received from Mercy were inviolation of CaliforniaLabor Code section 226(a). The violations include,but are not limitedto, the failuretoinclude the total hours worked hy Mr. Sowary and.other aggrieved employees. California Labor Code sections 551 and 552 require thatevery person employed in any occupation of laboris entitledto one day’s restin a seven-day workweek, thatno employer oflabor shallcause his employees towork move than sixdays in aworkweek, and thatan employer shallpay a civil penalty in the amounts of fiftydollars ($50) for each aggrieved employee per pay period forthe MH 000669 ANGE as Beery 4(Page es a € or: her job. dutiesof ¢ in dinate consequence, of his or ¢rher obedience to the direétionsof the eraployer. ‘business-related’ expensesand costs that were not fullyreimbursed by Mercy: “These costs’ ‘nelude, but arenot litnited ¢to,thelise of personal: phones for. business-related matters, Costs.of business: felated teavel,and the use of personal tools. ° . thersiere, on behalf ofall aggriéved empldyées} ‘Mr.‘Sowary. seeks allapplicable penaltiesarising. out of the above-referenced wage. ‘hour, and’ ‘payroll practices,or which. “could be assessed’ and colléctéd by the Labor and Workforce : Development Agency; forviolation of theCalifornia Labor Code™ pursuant to AGA}: including ¢ anamount sufficient ‘to: recover’ ‘itidérpaid wages pursuant to Labor Code: section’558." Tf you: ‘have’ ‘any questions Ttequire. additional: information, please: do not hesitate'tocontactiis: ‘Thank you for your attention to this’ tmatter and the noble:cause you advance each and’ everyday... Ce: (By US, Ceitified Mail / Retain ReceiptRequested). Mercy Services Corp Mercy Hoiising, Inc: ‘Mezcy’ Housitig Management: Group; Inc. ‘cloMare L. "Jactizzi ’ . ‘Simpson,’ ‘Gartity;fnines: & Jacuzzi, ‘PC ‘2175 N. California Bivd., Suite: 710° Walnut ‘Creék, CA 94596. ervey“Mall UndSepia CBr rig We Exjclosed): 455, Golden, Gate Avenile, 10th Floor, San:Francisco; California 94102 MH 000671. MH-:000672 iy { efi al t ffs te ae ‘ast 6: Wines MS ‘SwaNnaqs. ebe AAS. “ANNAN. 3 ee LSaMno te GOOG ODE eT. Ramee Fe v | PE peedSf JUSTICE. LAWYERS FOR ~ Mareh 12, 2021 BY ONLINE SUBMISSION California Labor & Workforce Development Agency PAGA filings@dir,ca. gov Re: MERCY HOUSING MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC.; MERCY HOUSING, INC. Dear Representative: We have been retained to represent LynDonna Gamez against Mercy Housing Management Group, Inc., and Mercy Housing, Inc. (including any and allaffiliates,subsidieries,parents, directors,officers,and einployees) (collectivelyreférred to as “Mercy Housing”) for violationsof California wage-and-hour laws. Ms, Gamez seeks penalties for violationsof the CaliforniaLabor Codec, which are recoverable under California Labor Code section 2698, etseq., theLabor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) and allother remedies available under PAGA. Ms. Gamez seeks these remedies on behalf of the Stateof California and “aggrieved employees,” as defined herein. This letteris sentin compliance with the reporting requirements of California Labor Code section 2699.3. Mercy Housing cmployed Ms. Gamez as an hourly-paid, non-exempt employee from approximately June 2019 toapproximately March 2020, in the State ofCalifornia. The “aggrieved employees” thatMs. Gamez may seek penalties on behalf of are allcurrent and former hourly-paid or non-exempt employees who worked for any of the above-referenced entitieswithin the State of California. Based on the following factsand theories,Mercy Iousing has violated and/or continues to violate, among other provisions ofthe California Labor Code and applicable wage law, California Labor Code sections 201, 202, 203, 204,.226(a), 226.7, 510, 512(a), 551, 552, 1174(d), 1194, 1197, T1974, 1198, 2800