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 Periods

Ruben Ramirez, an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated and aggrieved v. Sea Win Inc., Best International Trading Inc., All Good Foods Inc., and Does 1 through 100, inclusive

Published: Sep. 29, 2023 | Result Date: Apr. 27, 2023 | Filing Date: Jun. 11, 2021 |

Case number: 21STCV22026 Settlement –  $475,000

Judge

Lawrence P. Riff

Court

Los Angeles County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Jasmin K. Gill
(J. Gill Law Group PC)

David D. Bibiyan
(Bibiyan Law Group PC)

Diego F. Aviles
(Bibiyan Law Group PC)


Defendant

Gene F. Williams
(Gordon & Rees LLP)


Facts

Ruben Ramirez was employed by SeaWin, Inc. as a non-exempt, hourly paid employee. On May 3, 2021, Ramirez gave notice to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency and SeaWin, Inc. that he intended to serve as a proxy for the LWDA in a Private Attorneys General Act civil enforcement action. On June 11, 2021, Ramirez filed suit against SeaWin, Inc.; Best International Trading, Inc.; and All Good Foods, Inc. on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others similarly situated. In August, the complaint was amended to include PAGA claims.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: The plaintiff contended that the defendants failed to pay overtime and minimum wages; failed to provide meal and rest breaks; failed to pay compensation in lieu of missed breaks and meals; failed to provide accurate itemized wage statements; failed to pay wages timely; and engaged in unfair competitive practices in violation of the Unfair Competition Law. The plaintiff further contended that the defendants were liable for civil penalties for these alleged failures under the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: The defendants denied any wrongdoing or liability and all the plaintiff's material allegations.

Settlement Discussions

On August 30, 2022, the parties participated in a mediation with Lynn Frank, Esq.

Result

The parties reached an agreement wherein the defendant admitted no wrongdoing or liability but agreed to pay $475,000 to settle class and PAGA claims.


#141524

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

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