108 Litigating CA Wage & Hour Class and PAGA Actions (24th Edition) Seyfarth Shaw LLP | www.seyfarth.com A split emerged among California appellate courts regarding whether courts could strike PAGA claims on grounds of manageability. On one hand was the September 2021 decision in Wesson v. Staples the Office Superstore, LLC.536 In Wesson, the Second District Court of Appeal held that “courts have inherent authority to ensure that PAGA claims can be fairly and efficiently tried and, if necessary, may strike a claim that cannot be rendered manageable.”537 This is because PAGA actions cannot abridge a defendant’s due process right for a “fair and efficient trial of representative claims.” Several federal district courts thenadopted or applied Wesson.538 As Wesson cautions, “PAGA claims may well present more significant manageability concerns than those involved in class actions.”539 Generally, a PAGA action may “cover a vast number of employees, each of whom may have markedly different experiences relevant to the alleged violations.”540 In fact, even a single “PAGA claim can cover disparate groups of employees and involve different kinds of violations raising distinct questions.”541 “Under those circumstances, determining whether the employer committed Labor Code violations with respect to each employee may raise practical difficulties and may prove to be unmanageable.”542 In light of these considerations, Wesson concluded that a court is not “powerless to address the challenges presented by large and complex PAGA actions.”543 Nor is the court “bound to hold dozens, hundreds, or thousands of minitrials involving diverse questions, depending on the breadth of the plaintiff's claims.” “Equipped with this tool, courts dealing with representative [PAGA] claims pay close attention to manageability issues and intervene to ensure that the claims can be managed fairly and efficiently at trial.” As Wesson stressed, these inquiries are imperative to “manage litigation with the aim of protecting the parties’ rights and the courts’ ability to function.” Yet, on the other hand was the March 2022 decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc.544 In Estrada, the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that “a court cannot strike a PAGA claim on manageability” and thus “reach[es] the opposition conclusion” of Wesson.545 Estrada relied on differences between PAGA actions and class actions, concluding that “[a]llowing dismissal of unmanageable PAGA claims would effectively graft a class action requirement onto PAGA claims” and “would also interfere with PAGA's purpose as a law enforcement mechanism by placing an extra hurdle on PAGA plaintiffs that is not placed on the state.”546 536 Wesson v. Staples the Off. Superstore, LLC, 68 Cal. App. 5th 746 (2021). 537 Id. at 859. 538 E.g., Feltzs v. Cox Commc'ns Cal., LLC, 2021 WL 4947306, at *4 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 21, 2021) (Selna, J.); Chavez v. Charter Commc'ns, LLC, 2021 WL 6496864, at *3 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 1, 2021) (Staton, J.); Goro v. Flowers Foods, Inc., 2021 WL 5761694, at *5 (S.D. Cal. Dec. 3, 2021) (Robinson, J.). 539 Wesson, 68 Cal. App. 5th at 859-860. 540 Id. at 859. 541 Id. at 860. 542 Id. at 859. 543 Id. at 860. 544 Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., 76 Cal. App. 5th 685 (2022). 545 Id. at 687. 546 Id.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4