Filed 4/19/21 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE CITIZENS OF HUMANITY, LLC, B299469 et al., (Los Angeles County Super. Plaintiffs and Respondents, Ct. No. 18SMCV00066) v. OSCAR RAMIREZ et al., Defendants and Appellants. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Elaine Mandel, Judge. Reversed and remanded with directions. California Anti-SLAPP Project and Mark Goldowitz for Defendants and Appellants Oscar Ramirez and Law Offices of Oscar Ramirez. Verum Law Group, Sam K. Kim and Yoonis J. Han for Defendants and Appellants Kevin Mahoney and Mahoney Law Group. Mahoney Law Group, Kevin Mahoney and Joshua D. Klein for Defendant and Appellant Ana Jimenez. Browne George Ross, Peter W. Ross and Charles Avrith for Plaintiffs and Respondents. __________________________ An employee brought a wage and hour class action against her employer. Prior to certification, the action was settled. The employer paid a sum to the employee to resolve her individual claims, and she dismissed the class claims without prejudice, with court approval. Thereafter, the employer brought the current malicious prosecution action against the employee and her counsel. The employee and her counsel each moved to strike the action under the anti-SLAPP law (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16). The trial court denied the anti-SLAPP motions on the basis that the employer established a prima facie showing of prevailing on its malicious prosecution cause of action. We disagree. As the prior action resolved by settlement, the employer is unable to establish the action terminated in its favor as a matter of law. We therefore reverse and remand for determination of one unadjudicated anti-SLAPP issue, and whether the employee and her counsel are entitled to an award of attorney fees. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1. The Underlying Action Because we resolve this appeal on the element of favorable termination, we focus our discussion of the underlying action on the facts and procedure relevant to the termination of the action, and omit the substantial history relating to whether it was pursued with probable cause and/or malice. A. The Complaint Ana Jimenez was an hourly employee of Oheck, LLC, making clothing for Citizens of Humanity, LLC. In May 2015, Jimenez brought suit against Oheck, Citizens of Humanity, and Eric Kweon (collectively, Oheck) alleging eight causes of action 2 for wage and hour violations.1 Jimenez brought this action as an individual and on behalf of all other employees similarly situated. She also asserted a claim for civil penalties under the Private Attorney General Act (PAGA; Lab. Code, § 2698). Jimenez was represented by attorneys from two different law firms: Kevin Mahoney of Mahoney Law Group, APC; and Oscar Ramirez of Law Offices of Oscar Ramirez, PC. B. Jimenez Expresses Interest in Settlement At a case management conference in January 2017, the court opened discovery on class issues only, and directed Jimenez to file her motion for class certification by September 29, 2017. Jimenez was deposed on April 27, 2017. The parties disputed whether …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals