Search anything: case name, case number, motion type, judge, or party

GLENAIR, INC., ET AL VS. AMPHENOL CORPORATION, ET AL

Glenair, Inc. v. Amphenol Corporation EC065871 Unopposed motion of defendants Amphenol Corporation and Fiber Systems International, Inc. to Seal Designated Portions of the Declaration of Jennifer S. Baldocchi in Support of Motion for Summary Adjudication is granted.

  • Hearing

    Jan 26, 2018

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

GLENAIR, INC., ET AL VS. AMPHENOL CORPORATION, ET AL

Glenair, Inc. v. Ampehnol Corporation EC065871 Motion of plaintiffs Glenair, Inc. and Dabrowski for partial summary judgment is off calendar. Motion of defendant Phommacnanh for judgment on the pleadings is granted. To the extent the third and fourth causes of action seek declarations of the rights of similarly situated individuals, the court notes plaintiffs have dismissed these causes of action to the extent they seek such relief.

  • Hearing

    Dec 01, 2017

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

GLENAIR, INC., ET AL VS. AMPHENOL CORPORATION, ET AL

Glenair, Inc. v. Amphenol Corporation EC065871 Motion of defendant Amphenol Corporation and Fiber System International Inc. to compel further responses from plaintiff Glenair, Inc. to Request for Production of Documents and Things, Set One: The motion is moot as to Requests Nos. 28 and 54, according to the Reply.

  • Hearing

    Oct 13, 2017

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

GLENAIR, INC., ET AL VS. AMPHENOL CORPORATION, ET AL

Glenair, Inc. v. Amphenol Corp. (EC065871) No tentative.

  • Hearing

    Mar 09, 2018

GLENAIR, INC., ET AL VS. AMPHENOL CORPORATION, ET AL

Glenair, Inc. v. Amphenol Corporation EC065871 Motion of defendants Amphenol Corporation and Fiber Systems International, Inc. to stay or dismiss claims of plaintiffs Glenair, Inc., Michael Dabrowski on the grounds of inconvenient forum (CCP § 418.10(a)(2)) and in the interest of substantial justice (CCP § 410.30(a)) is denied. Moving parties bear the burden to prove that the action should be tried elsewhere.

  • Hearing

    Jan 27, 2017

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

GLENAIR, INC., ET AL VS. AMPHENOL CORPORATION, ET AL

Glenair, Inc. v. Amphenol Corporation EC065871 Motion of defendants Amphenol Corporation and Fiber Systems International, Inc. to stay or dismiss claims of plaintiffs Glenair, Inc., against Michael Dabrowski on the grounds of inconvenient forum (CCP § 418.10(a)(2)) and in the interest of substantial justice (CCP § 410.30(a)) is denied. Moving parties bear the burden to prove that the action should be tried elsewhere.

  • Hearing

    Mar 10, 2017

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

LERNER & VEIT, PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION V. POWER

Glenair, Inc. (2018) 23 Cal.App.5th 262 does not compel a different conclusion as to privity in this case where the defendant and Stephen Power’s relationship was akin to co-obligors. As stated in DKN Holdings, “[a] nonparty alleged to be in privity must have an interest so similar to the party's interest that the party acted as the nonparty's ‘ “ ‘virtual representative’ ” ’ in the first action. [Citation.]

  • Hearing

    Feb 11, 2019

THOMAS VS EASY DRIVING SCHOOL LLC [EFILE]

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, 866–867, as modified on denial of reh'g (Dec. 13, 2017), review denied (Feb. 14, 2018)) Because an employee's PAGA action functions as a substitute for an action brought by the government itself, under the doctrine of collateral estoppel, a judgment unfavorable to the employee binds the government, as well as all aggrieved nonparty employees potentially entitled to assert a PAGA action.

  • Hearing

    Jun 06, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

GOMEZ VS VORTEX MAINTENANCE INC

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, 873, as modified on denial of reh'g (Dec. 13, 2017); See also, Tan v. GrubHub, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2016) 171 F.Supp.3d 998, 1012–1013) Defendant shall answer by March 16, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Mar 05, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

GOMEZ VS VORTEX MAINTENANCE INC

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, 873, as modified on denial of reh'g (Dec. 13, 2017); See also, Tan v. GrubHub, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2016) 171 F.Supp.3d 998, 1012–1013) Defendant shall answer by March 16, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Mar 05, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

ESTEBAN PALOMINO V. NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORP., ET AL.

Glenair, Inc., supra, 17 Cal.App.5th at p. 873.) Considering that the actions at issue here were filed in close succession and are both in their early stages, the Court will not apply the rule here. The Court further notes that the plaintiff in this action brings a putative class claim in addition to a PAGA claim.

  • Hearing

    Feb 07, 2020

INMANY V. AGRI CENTER AUTO PARTS, INC., ET AL.

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, 872; Betancourt, supra, 9 Cal.App.5th at p. 449; Hernandez, supra, 7 Cal.App.5th at p. 178; Civ. Code §§ 1668, 3513.) In the case at bench, Petitioner seeks to compel Respondent to arbitrate his claims, on the ground that Respondent signed two successive employment contracts, as well as an employee handbook, all of which contained an arbitration provision. (See Pet., Exhs. A-C.)

  • Hearing

    May 13, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

MOHAMMED VS FORTUNE COMMERCIAL CORPORATION

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, 866, citing Tan v. GrubHub, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2016) 171 F.Supp.3d 998, 1012–1013.

  • Hearing

    Jan 23, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

RUMSEY VS LOS ROBLES HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER

Glenair, Inc. (2018) 23 Cal.App.5th 262, 282-283.) Here, the Court exercises its discretion in favor of considering Dr. Barcay's statements regarding Dr. Matts' compliance with the standard of care, on the grounds that (a) the present motion is unopposed; (b) the basis of Dr. Matts' motion is very clear; and (c) the critical portions of Dr. Barcay's declaration are cited to directly in Dr. Matts' Moving Brief. (See Moving Brief, 7:2-7.) Considering Dr. Barcay's declaration statements, Dr.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

MOHAMMED VS FORTUNE COMMERCIAL CORPORATION

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, 866, citing Tan v. GrubHub, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2016) 171 F.Supp.3d 998, 1012–1013.

  • Hearing

    Jan 23, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

GUILLERMO PADILLA VS DEWEY SERVICES, INC.

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, 869–872 [225 Cal. Rptr. 3d 798] (Julian); Betancourt v. Prudential Overall Supply (2017) 9 Cal.App.5th 439, 445–449 [215 Cal. Rptr. 3d 344]; Tanguilig, supra, 5 Cal.App.5th at pp. 677–680.)

  • Hearing

    Dec 03, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

HOKANSON VS NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, 871 (PAGA claims not subject to arbitration because § 2699 “is simply a procedural statute allowing an aggrieved employee to recover civil penalties—for Labor Code violations—that otherwise would be sought by state labor law enforcement agencies.”)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2019

HOKANSON VS NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, 871 (PAGA claims not subject to arbitration because § 2699 “is simply a procedural statute allowing an aggrieved employee to recover civil penalties—for Labor Code violations—that otherwise would be sought by state labor law enforcement agencies.”)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2019

ZERIUS COLLINS VS. HASA INC.

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, 870-873.) Guerrero entered into a post-dispute arbitration agreement, i.e., after he had given a sixty-day notice to the LWDA and therefore had obtained the right to file a PAGA case. “At that point, an employee’s waiver of the trial right and an agreement to arbitrate may be enforceable.” (Correia v. NB Baker Electric, Inc. (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 602, 622.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 15, 2019

MATEOS VS IEC

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal. App. 5th 853, 866-67: “Furthermore, nothing in the PAGA statutory scheme forecloses separate but similar actions by different employees against the same employer. (Tan v. GrubHub, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2016) 171 F.Supp.3d 998, 1012–1013 (Tan).)

  • Hearing

    Dec 07, 2018

VELASQUEZ VS IEC CORPORATION

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal. App. 5th 853, 866-67: “Furthermore, nothing in the PAGA statutory scheme forecloses separate but similar actions by different employees against the same employer. (Tan v. GrubHub, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2016) 171 F.Supp.3d 998, 1012–1013 (Tan).)

  • Hearing

    Dec 07, 2018

ANGELA CHOE VS OMI SUSHI, INC., ET AL.

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, 871.) Employees bringing civil actions under the PAGA do so “as the proxy or agent of the state’s labor law enforcement agencies.” (Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC (2014) 59 Cal.4th 348, 380, internal quotations omitted.)

  • Hearing

    Dec 06, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

JOE PHEBUS V. SAN JOSE, LLC, ET AL.

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, 866-867 [noting that collateral estoppel protects the employer under these circumstances].) Relatedly, “[i]n determining whether the causes of action are the same for purposes of pleas in abatement, the rule is that such a plea may be maintained only where a judgment in the first action would be a complete bar to the second action.” (Plant Insulation Co. v. Fibreboard Corp., supra, 224 Cal.App.3d at pp. 787-788.)

  • Hearing

    Mar 23, 2018

ANDRES ALEJANDRO MERCADO V. SECURITY INDUSTRY SPECIALISTS, INC., ET AL.

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, Tanguilig v. Bloomingdale’s, Inc. (2016) 5 Cal.App.5th 665, Hernandez v. Ross Stores, Inc. (2016) 7 Cal.App.5th 171, Perez v. U-Haul Co. of Cal. (2016) 3 Cal.App.5th 408, and Williams v. Superior Court (Pinkerton Governmental Services, Inc.) (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 642, which held that various aspects of PAGA claims were not subject to predispute arbitration agreements. IV. Conclusion and Order Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file the FAC is GRANTED.

  • Hearing

    Feb 16, 2018

DEWAYNE CASSEL V. GOOGLE LLC, ET AL.

Glenair, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 853, 872.) Plaintiff contends that, even accepting that the state for which he now acts as a representative is not a party to the arbitration agreement here, Google is. He cites Garcia v.

  • Hearing

    Oct 26, 2018

1 2     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.