Tentative Ruling: Joshua Cahill vs Marriott International Inc et al

Case Number

24CV02395

Case Type

Hearing Date / Time

Fri, 04/24/2026 - 10:00

Nature of Proceedings

CMC; Motion for Approval

Tentative Ruling

For the reasons stated herein, the motion of plaintiff for preliminary approval of class action and PAGA settlement is continued to May 29, 2026. On or before May 15, 2026, plaintiff shall file and serve an appropriate supplemental brief or declaration as further described herein.

Background:

The first amended complaint (FAC) filed in this action by plaintiff Joshua Cahill alleges that in October 2023, plaintiff was employed by Marriott International, Inc. (Marriot), Residence Inn By Marriott, LLC (Residence Inn), and Courtyard Management LLC (Courtyard) (collectively, Defendants), as an hourly, non-exempt employee in Santa Barbara, California. Defendants failed to pay plaintiff minimum and overtime wages, to provide or pay for missed meal and rest periods, to pay wages owed upon discharge or resignation, to provide complete and accurate wage statements reflecting the total number of hours worked by plaintiff, to keep complete and accurate payroll records, and to reimburse plaintiff for necessary business related expenses.

Plaintiff filed their original complaint against Marriott and Residence Inn on April 29, 2024, asserting ten causes of action: (1) violation of Labor Code sections 510 and 1198; (2) violation of Labor Code sections 226.7 and 512, subdivision (a); (3) violation of Labor Code section 226.7; (4) violation of Labor Code sections 1194, 1197, and 1197.1; (5) violation of Labor Code sections 201 and 202; (6) violation of Labor Code section 204; (7) violation of Labor Code section 226, subdivision (a); (8) violation of Labor Code section 1174, subdivision (d); (9) violation of Labor Code sections 2800 and 2802; and (10) violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq.

On June 13, 2024, Marriott and Residence Inn filed their answer to plaintiff’s complaint, generally denying its allegations and asserting affirmative defenses.

On October 27, 2025, with leave of court, plaintiff filed their operative FAC against Defendants, asserting the same ten causes of action against Defendants described above and adding an eleventh cause of action for violation of Labor Code section 2698 et seq. (the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 or PAGA). The FAC is brought on behalf of plaintiff; all current and former non-exempt employees of Defendants who were employed at the Residence Inn Santa Barbara Goleta or the Courtyard Santa Barbara Goleta from April 29, 2020; and all current or former employees of Defendants employed at the Residence Inn Santa Barbara Goleta or the Courtyard Santa Barbara Goleta from February 22, 2023. (FAC, ¶¶ 15 & 22.)

Defendants have not filed an answer to the FAC with the court.

On December 18, 2025, plaintiff filed an unopposed motion for an order granting preliminary approval of a proposed class action settlement described in a “Joint Stipulation of Class Action and PAGA Settlement” (the Settlement Agreement); certifying a settlement class; appointing plaintiff as the representative of the settlement class; appointing Joanna Ghosh, Yasmin Hosseini, and Daniel Bass of Lawyers for Justice, PC, as counsel for the settlement class; approving a proposed “Notice of Class Action Settlement” (the Class Notice); directing the mailing of the Class Notice in accordance with the Settlement Agreement; approving ILYM Group, Inc., as the settlement administrator; and scheduling a final approval hearing.

Analysis:

“A settlement or compromise of an entire class action, or of a cause of action in a class action, or as to a party, requires the approval of the court after hearing.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.769(a).) “Any party to a settlement agreement may serve and file a written notice of motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. The settlement agreement and proposed notice to class members must be filed with the motion, and the proposed order must be lodged with the motion.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.769(c).) “The content of the class notice is subject to court approval.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.766(d).)

A copy of the Settlement Agreement is attached to the declaration of plaintiff’s counsel, Daniel Bass (attorney Bass), submitted in support of the motion. (Bass Dec., ¶ 11 & exhibit 2.) The Settlement Agreement states that the proposed Class Notice is attached to that agreement, and provides that the Class Notice will be mailed within 14 days of the date the settlement administrator receives a complete list of all current and former non-exempt employees of Defendants employed at the Residence Inn Santa Barbara Goleta or the Courtyard Santa Barbara Goleta from April 29, 2020, through the date of preliminary approval. (Bass Dec., exhibit 2, ¶¶ 10(c)-(f) & 24(a).) Attorney Bass also states that the parties and their counsel have approved the proposed Class Notice. (Bass Dec., ¶ 11.)

The court’s copy of the motion includes what appears to be an incomplete copy of the proposed Class Notice. For example, the proposed Class Notice attached as exhibit A to the Settlement Agreement ostensibly consists of 7 pages. The court’s copy of the Bass declaration includes only pages 2 through 6 of the Class Notice. For these and all further reasons discussed above, the motion is procedurally inappropriate. In addition, without a complete copy of the proposed Class Notice, the court is unable to determine if that notice is sufficient to notify members of the settlement class of their rights and obligations in connection with the proposed settlement, or complies with due process. (Martorana v. Marlin & Saltzman (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 685, 694-695; 7-Eleven Owners for Fair Franchising v. Southland Corp. (2000) 85 Cal.App.4th 1135, 1164.)

For all reasons discussed above, the court will continue the hearing on the motion to permit plaintiff an opportunity to submit a complete copy of the proposed Class Notice described in the Settlement Agreement and the declaration of attorney Bass. The complete copy of the Class Notice may be submitted with an appropriate supplemental brief or declaration.