Gomez v. J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor

1

MARISOL GOMEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. J. JACOBO FARM LABOR CONTRACTOR, INC., Defendant.

No. 1:15-cv-1489 JLT BAM

United States District Court, E.D. California

September 26, 2024

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE CLASS SETTLEMENT AS MODIFIED BY STIPULATIONS OF THE PARTIES (Docs. 190, 195, 202, 203)

Marisol Gomez seeks to hold J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor, Inc. liable for violations of California wage and hour laws and the federal Agricultural Workers Protection Act. (See generally Docs. 1, 95.) Gomez now seeks preliminary approval of a class settlement reached in this action. Specifically, Gomez seeks: (1) conditional certification of the settlement class; (2) preliminary approval of the settlement; (3) appointment as the class representative; (4) appointment of the firms of Mallison & Martinez and Martinez Aguilasocho Law, Inc. as class counsel; (5) approval of the class notice; (6) appointment of Phoenix Settlement Administration as the settlement administrator; and (7) scheduling for final approval. (See Doc. 190-1 at 22; see also Doc. 200 at 6-7.)

The Court reviewed the proposed settlement, subsequent stipulations concerning modification of the settlement terms and supplemental briefs. For the following reasons, the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

Marisol Gomez asserts she is a former employee of J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor, for whom she performed “agricultural work.” (Doc. 95 at 4, ¶ 13.) Gomez reports she worked “at agreed-upon piece rates that varied over her period of employment,” which ended in 2015. (Id.)

Gomez contends that with the piece-rate policy, she was not compensated “for all hours worked” within the meaning of California Wage Orders. (Id. at 7, ¶ 25 [quotation marks omitted].) She asserts Defendant also failed “to pay overtime premium wages for work performed in the fields.” (Id.) Gomez alleges Defendant failed to provide proper meal and rest breaks, and had a “policy to not pay the premium wages owed to workers for missed and untimely” meal and rest breaks. (Id. at 78, ¶¶ 26-27.) In addition, she contends that “Defendant[] had a policy of discouraging and preventing employees from taking rest breaks.” (Id. at 8, ¶ 27.) Further, she alleges Defendant failed “to maintain accurate time-keeping records” and “willfully provide[d] inaccurate itemized wage statements that [did] not reflect all ‘hours worked,' wages earned and applicable pay rates.” (Id., ¶ 28.)

On September 30, 2015, Gomez initiated this action by filing a complaint on behalf of herself and a class including all individuals who are, or have been, employed in California by J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor “within four (4) years of the filing of the Initial Complaint in this action.” (Doc. 1 at 9, ¶ 35.) She sought to hold the defendants-at that time, J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor and Bedrosian Farms LLC-liable for violations of the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, the California Labor Code, and California Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq., and penalties under California's Private Attorney General Act.^[1] (Id. at 6, ¶ 21; see also id. at 1.) After the Court granted Gomez leave to amend, Ignacio Osorio-Cruz was added as a named plaintiff on August 28, 2018. (Docs. 93, 95.)

Bedrosian Farms moved for summary judgment on the claims raised against the company, after which Plaintiffs stipulated to dismiss the claims against Bedrosian Farms. (Docs. 91, 97.) Based upon the stipulation of the parties, the Court dismissed the claims against Bedrosian Farms with prejudice on September 6 2018. (Doc. 98.) Thus, J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor is now the only defendant.

Gomez and Osorio-Cruz moved for class certification, requesting certification of a class including “all individuals who have been employed or are currently employed, by Defendant[] J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor Inc. as a non-exempt ‘field worker' or agricultural worker who worked at any time from September 30, 2011 up to the present.” (Doc. 108 at 2.) Plaintiffs also proposed several subclasses based upon the claims raised, including rest breaks for those who worked on a piece rate basis, meal breaks inaccurate/incomplete wage statements, MAWPA, and claims under Labor Code Section 17200. (Id. at 2-4.) The Court granted the motion in part, and certified the “Wage Statement” subclass of “[a]ll individuals who were employed as a non-exempt field worker or agricultural worker from September 30, 2012, to November 5, 2019, by J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor, Inc.” (Doc. 114 at 56.) The Court appointed Osorio-Cruz as the sole class representative; and appointed Stan Mallison, Hector Martinez, Mario Martinez, and Edgar Aguilasocho as Class Counsel. (Id.)

Plaintiffs moved for reconsideration regarding claims that were not certified, and the Court granted the motion. (Docs. 117, 126.) The Court determined “Plaintiffs' rest break claim, wages upon termination claim, accurate itemized wage statement claim[], MAWPA claim, and unfair business practices claim warrant class certification under Rule 23(b)(3).” (Doc. 126 at 12-13 [footnote omitted].) Therefore, the Court certified an additional “Piece Rate Rest Period” class to address these claims. (Id. at 13.) Defendant also filed a motion for reconsideration (Doc. 129), and the Court modified the “Piece Rate Rest Period” class definition to include: “individuals who have been employed, or are currently employed, by Defendant as a non-exempt ‘field worker' or agricultural worker, who worked on a piece rate basis at any time from September 30, 2011, to November 5, 2019, and were not separately compensated for rest periods during their piece rate shifts.” (Doc. 138 at 13.)

After the parties filed their proposed class notice, the Court determined further modifications of the class definitions were necessary to clarify the certified claims for the putative class members. (See Doc. 151.) Ultimately, the Court determined the class notice should contain the following definitions for the putative class:

Inaccurate/Incomplete Wage Statement Subclass:

All individuals who were employed by J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor Inc. as a non-exempt field worker or agricultural worker at any time from September 30, 2012, to November 5, 2019.

The Inaccurate/Incomplete Wage Statement Subclass applies to the certified claim for Defendant's alleged violation of the California Labor Code for failure to provide accurate wage statements.

Piece Rate Rest Period Subclass:

All individuals who were employed by J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor Inc. as a non-exempt field worker or agricultural worker at any time from September 30, 2011, to November 5, 2019, and who worked on a piece rate basis and were not separately compensated for rest periods during their piece rate shifts.

The Piece Rate Rest Period Subclass applies to the certified claim for Defendant's alleged violation of California Labor Code and Industrial Wage Order provisions regarding employee rest periods. The subclass also applies to the following certified claims that are derivative of the rest period claim: alleged violations of the federal Agricultural Workers Protection Act, California's unfair competition law under California Business and Professions Code, and California Labor Code and Industrial Wage Order provisions regarding wage statements and separation wages.

(Doc. 151 at 6; see also id. at 7.) The Court approved the class notice and ordered service upon the class members on April 8, 2021. (Doc. 155 at 4.)

In late 2022, the parties engaged in limited expert witness discovery. (See Doc. 161 at 2-3.) Plaintiffs designated an expert witness, Aaron Woolfson, and produced his report to Defendant on October 28, 2022. (Id. at 2, ¶ 3.) Defendant disclosed a rebuttal expert and produced his report on November 8, 2022. (Id., ¶ 4.) Defendant moved to exclude testimony from Mr. Woolfson and moved to decertify the class. (Docs. 167, 168.) Defendant argued that Plaintiffs could not establish commonality, or that “questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members or that a class action is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating the controversy.” (Doc. 168 at 5.) The Court denied Defendant's motions to exclude the expert testimony and to decertify the classes on May 23, 2023. (Doc. 178.)

Following the denial of the motion to decertify the classes, the parties participated in a private mediation with Judge Donald Black. (Doc. 190-2 at 9.) Stan Mallison reports that J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor ceased doing business and financial documents show “about $100,000 in total assets.” (Doc. 202-2 at 10, Mallsion Decl. ¶ 17.) Based upon this information, the parties “accepted [the] mediator's proposal to resolve the Lawsuit” for a gross settlement fund of $100,000. (Id., ¶¶ 17-18.) According to Mr. Mallison, “the primary impetus of the proposed settlement agreement [was] Defendant's limited financial resources.” (Id., ¶ 17.)

The parties entered into the “Settlement Agreement and Release,” which Plaintiff Marisol Gomez executed on November 16, 2023; and Javier Jacobo executed on behalf of Defendant J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor on November 9, 2023. (Doc. 190-3 at 22; Doc. 202-3 at 22.) Gomez filed a motion for preliminary approval of the agreement on January 10, 2024. (Doc. 190.)

In the motion for preliminary approval, Gomez reported she is “the only Plaintiff and Class Representative, due to the passing of Ignacio Osorio.” (Doc. 191-1 at 6, n.6; see also Doc. 190-2 at 8, Mallison Decl. ¶ 8.) Because counsel did not comply with the requirements of...