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

Angel Garica, individually, and on behalf of other members of the public similarly situated v. J&B Investments Inc. dba J&B Materials Inc., Pacific Gypsum Supply Inc., Gypsum Management and Supply Inc., and Does 1 through 25, inclusive

Published: Oct. 13, 2023 | Result Date: Feb. 3, 2023 | Filing Date: Apr. 25, 2022 |

Case number: CIVSB2113372 Settlement –  $1,750,000

Judge

Joseph T. Ortiz

Court

San Bernardino County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Jonathan M. Genish
(Blackstone Law APC)

Miriam L. Schimmel
(Blackstone Law APC)

Joana Fang
(Blackstone Law APC)

Robert L. Esensten
(Esensten Law)

Jordan S. Esensten
(Esensten Law)

Joseph Lavi
(Lavi & Ebrahimian LLP)

Vincent C. Granberry
(Lavi & Ebrahimian LLP)

Pooja V. Patel
(Lavi & Ebrahimian LLP)


Defendant

Elizabeth P. Staggs-Wilson
(Littler Mendelson PC)


Facts

Angel Garcia, Christian Melendez, Jack Mahan, Athena Neri, and Eduardo Lopez filed separate suits against J&B Investments, dba J&B Materials, Pacific Gypsum Supply, and Gypsum Management and Supply. The former employees filed their wage-and-hour in different superior courts: Riverside, San Bernardino, and Los Angeles.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs contended that defendant failed to pay and/or accurately calculate minimum, regular, overtime, double time, prevailing and vacation wages; failed to provide meal and/or rest periods or pay premiums in lieu of; failed to reimburse and indemnify expenses; failed to timely pay wages during and on termination of employment; failed to provide and/or keep accurate and timely wage statements and employment records; and violated Unfair Competition laws. They also asserted Private Attorneys General Act claims against defendant.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied any liability or wrongdoing associated with the lawsuit.

Settlement Discussions

On May 4, 2022, the parties participated in mediation with Tripper Ortman, Esq. which resulted in the settlement.

Result

The parties agreed to settle the claims for $1.75 million.


#141647

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

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