From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Radcliff v. San Diego Gas & Elec. Co.

United States District Court, Southern District of California
Nov 28, 2023
20-cv-1555-H-MSB (S.D. Cal. Nov. 28, 2023)

Opinion

20-cv-1555-H-MSB

11-28-2023

DAVID RADCLIFF, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated and aggrieved, Plaintiff, v. SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY, a California corporation; SEMPRA ENERGY, a California corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants.


ORDER PENDING MANDATE HEARING

MARILYN L. HUFF, SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

On November 20, 2023, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed this Court's decision to dismiss Plaintiff David Radcliff's (“Plaintiff”) representative claim for penalties under the California Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) and remanded the case to this Court “for proceedings consistent with the parties' joint motion.” (Doc. No. 63.)

For the purposes of this order, the Court uses the term “individual” PAGA claims to mean claims that are premised on California Labor Code violations “actually sustained by the plaintiff” and “representative” PAGA claims to mean those claims “arising out of events involving other employees.” See Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S.Ct. 1906, 1916 (2022).

The Court issues this Order pending the forthcoming Ninth Circuit mandate and subsequent mandate hearing to be held in this Court. Pursuant to the Ninth Circuit's instructions and the parties' joint motion, the Court (1) reinstates Plaintiff's representative PAGA claim; (2) orders the parties to arbitrate Plaintiff's individual PAGA claim; and (3) stays the representative PAGA claim pending the outcome of the arbitration of all of Plaintiff's individual claims. Joint Stipulation and Proposed Order at 3, David Radcliff v. San Diego Gas & Electric Company; Sempra Energy, No. 22-55940 (9th Cir. 2023) (Doc. No. 34); see also Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 14 Cal.5th 1104 (2023); Rocha v. U-Haul of California, 88 Cal.App.5th 65, 77-78 (2023). The Court will schedule a telephonic status conference once the Ninth Circuit issues its mandate.

Plaintiff's PAGA claim is the eleventh cause of action in his Complaint. (Doc. No. 1-2; Compl. ¶¶ 68-71.)

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Radcliff v. San Diego Gas & Elec. Co.

United States District Court, Southern District of California
Nov 28, 2023
20-cv-1555-H-MSB (S.D. Cal. Nov. 28, 2023)
Case details for

Radcliff v. San Diego Gas & Elec. Co.

Case Details

Full title:DAVID RADCLIFF, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated…

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of California

Date published: Nov 28, 2023

Citations

20-cv-1555-H-MSB (S.D. Cal. Nov. 28, 2023)

Citing Cases

Josephson v. Lamon Constr. Co.

Since this decision in Adolph, other district courts in California have concluded that plaintiffs retain…

Bracamontes v. United Rentals, Inc.

, other district courts in California have concluded that plaintiffs retain standing to pursue non-individual…