Case Number: BC551426??? Hearing Date: April 25, 2016??? Dept: 56
Case Name: Estrada, et al. v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC, et al.
Case No.: BC551426
Matter: Demurrer to FAC
Tentative Ruling: Demurrer is overruled.
Plaintiffs Juan Estrada, Troy Allen, Robert Rodriguez, Eric Maldonado, and Jose Ceballos filed this employment action against Defendant Loews Hollywood Hotel LLC. The operative pleading is the First Amended Complaint, which includes a 3rd cause of action for PAGA penalties. Defendant demurs to the 3rd COA.
Defendant demurs to the 3rd COA on the ground that Plaintiffs have failed to comply with the pre-filing administrative requirements under Labor Code ?2699.3(a)(1). That provision requires the plaintiff to give written notice to the Labor Workforce Development Agency and the employer ?of the specific provisions of this [Labor] code alleged to have been violated, including the facts and theories to support the alleged violation.? The purpose of this notice is to allow the LWDA and the employer the opportunity to investigate and cure alleged violations. See Lab. Code ?2699.3(a)(2)(A)-(B); Willner v. Manpower Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2014) 35 F.Supp.3d 1116, 1135.
Defendant argues that Plaintiffs? notice letter failed to provide sufficient facts as to the alleged violations and the identity of the aggrieved employees. Neither state nor federal courts have defined the exact standard for this requirement. In Caliber Bodyworks v. Superior Court (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 365, 381-83, the Court of Appeal merely held that a plaintiff must plead compliance with the notice requirement but did not address the sufficiency of the notice. And the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that ?a string of legal conclusions with no factual allegations or theories of liability to support them? is insufficient. Alcantar v. Hobart Service (9th Cir. 2015) 800 F.3d 1047, 1057; accord Archila v. KFC U.S. Properties (9th Cir. 2011) 420 Fed.Appx. 667, 669.
Plaintiffs? letter is more than this. In pertinent part the letter states that it is submitted by hourly, non-exempt employees of Loews Hollywood Hotel; they have been employed for nearly two years; they and all California employees have been denied meal and rest breaks; since at least July 2012 they and all California employees have not been furnished timely itemized wage statements showing total hours worked; and this has resulted in entitlement to additional pay and civil penalties. Plaintiffs? letter provided sufficient notice to LWDA and Loews Hollywood Hotel for the purpose of investigation and cure; particularly in light of the relatively straightforward violations alleged.
The demurrer is overruled, and Defendant shall answer within 10 days.