This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Employment Law
Wage and Hour
Meal and Rest Period

Alisa Alvarez and Maria Alvarez on behalf of themselves and other aggrieved employees v. Hanford Community Hospital (dba Adventist Health Hanford), Reedley Community Hospital (dba Adventist Health Reedley) and Does 1 through 10, inclusive

Published: Dec. 18, 2020 | Result Date: Nov. 17, 2020 | Filing Date: Jan. 29, 2019 |

Case number: 19CECG00366 Settlement –  $140,000

Judge

Rosemary T. McGuire

Court

Fresno County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

David R. Markham
(The Markham Law Firm)

Maggie K. Realin
(The Markham Law Firm)

Lisa R. Brevard
(The Markham Law Firm)

Walter L. Haines
(United Employees Law Group PC)


Defendant

Daniel C. Whang
(Seyfarth Shaw LLP)


Facts

Alisa Alvarez and Maria Alvarez both worked as non-exempt employees at Reedley Community Hospital (Adventist Health Reedley) and its affiliated hospitals. The Alvarez's both filed a representative action under California's Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) and various Labor Code sections.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs contended that defendants violated various labor code sections through its unlawful payment practices. In addition to not making payments for overtime work, the wage statements sent to plaintiffs were incomplete. Defendants also failed to make timely wage payments upon termination or for expenses necessarily incurred as part of their employment.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied the contentions.

Result

The court approved a $140,000 settlement between the parties. The plaintiffs did not receive incentive awards because the court determined that while they such awards have been approved in past PAGA claims, the instant action did not warrant an award to plaintiffs. Moreover, the court allocated 33 percent of the total award to attorney's fees and no more than $15,000 to costs.


#136197

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390