Jurimatic: Verdicts and Settlements

The class action Vijay Sheth vs. Icon Burger Acquisition LLC concluded with a $989,940 settlement after thousands of Smashburger employees alleged widespread violations of California labor laws. Filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, the case accused the company of denying meal and rest breaks, underpaying wages, and issuing inaccurate pay statements. While the company denied wrongdoing, it agreed to the settlement to avoid further litigation. The fund compensates affected employees, pays PAGA penalties, and covers attorney fees—ending a multi-year wage and hour dispute across California Smashburger locations.

On February 16, 2022, Sherrell Whitfield initiated a premises liability lawsuit against the City and County of San Francisco and the San Francisco Housing Authority. The plaintiff alleged that a dangerous condition on public property, which the municipal defendants controlled and had knowledge of, caused her to sustain significant personal injuries and property damage. The case was filed under Unlimited Civil Jurisdiction, indicating a high financial claim. The City, represented by the City Attorney’s Office, denied all negligence claims, often relying on California’s statutory governmental immunities in its defense. Facing the complexity and expense of a full trial, which would have involved detailed expert testimony, both parties chose to resolve the dispute. On March 12, 2025, the case concluded when the defendants agreed to a settlement, paying Sherrell Whitfield the sum of $100,000 to finalize all claims.

The representative action, Rosario Zavala v. Post Acute Care Partners Inc., et al., filed in November 2023, asserted that the healthcare company violated numerous California Labor Code sections, including failures related to minimum wage, overtime pay, and providing compliant meal and rest periods. The lawsuit, brought under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), sought civil penalties on behalf of the state and the aggrieved employees. The case concluded with a court-approved PAGA Settlement on July 30, 2025, in the Superior Court of California, County of Orange. Post Acute Care Partners Inc. paid a $100,000 Gross Settlement Amount to resolve the civil penalty claims, with 75% of the fund allocated to the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency.

The class action lawsuit, Pary Al Zahawi, et al. v. The Kind Center, Inc., et al., targeted multiple cannabis industry employers for systemic violations of California wage and hour laws. Filed in December 2022, the complaint asserted that hundreds of current and former employees had been denied proper minimum wage, overtime pay, and mandated rest and meal periods. The defendants also faced claims under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) for issuing inaccurate wage statements. The case concluded with a Final Order and Judgment Approving Class Settlement on July 14, 2025, which established a $2,800,000 Gross Settlement Fund to compensate the class members for their alleged labor law violations.

The Tramil v. City and County of San Francisco lawsuit began in 2019 after former employee Mary Tramil alleged the City violated the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). The complaint asserted that the City had failed to engage in a mandatory interactive process and refused to provide reasonable accommodations for her physical disability, ultimately leading to her wrongful discharge. Tramil sought lost wages, benefits, and compensation for emotional distress. The CCSF denied all liability, citing various immunities and arguing that its actions were reasonable and non-discriminatory. After years of litigation, the parties reached a negotiated settlement, concluding the case for $230,000.

The lawsuit, Catton v. City of San Diego, began in September 2023 when property owner David Catton sued the City for inverse condemnation, alleging that governmental action or inaction had deprived his property of all economic value. Mr. Catton sought damages for the full loss of property value, use, and income, along with attorney and expert fees. The City of San Diego vehemently denied liability, citing governmental immunity, the statute of limitations, and the plaintiff's failure to mitigate. After a year and a half of litigation, the parties negotiated a conditional settlement, which was officially filed with the court on May 14, 2025. This resolution settled the complex property rights dispute in its entirety, with the City agreeing to compensate the property owner with $420,000.

In a landmark patent infringement case, Optis Wireless Technology and its affiliates won a $300 million jury verdict against Apple Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas. The dispute centered on Apple’s use of LTE-standard technology in its devices without paying FRAND-compliant royalties. Optis claimed Apple’s infringement was willful, depriving them of rightful licensing revenue. Apple countered with defenses of non-infringement and invalid patents. After extensive testimony, the jury awarded Optis a $300 million lump-sum FRAND royalty. On appeal, the Federal Circuit upheld parts of the verdict, reversed others, and remanded certain issues for further proceedings, keeping the case active and its final outcome pending.

The City and County of San Francisco secured a $1.3 million court judgment against property consultants Santos & Urrutia Associates, Inc. and several individuals after years of litigation over unlawful building practices. The City alleged that the defendants had repeatedly conducted unpermitted construction, violating state and municipal safety codes and endangering public welfare. On October 22, 2025, Judge Garrett L. Wong ruled in favor of the City, awarding $755,000 in civil penalties, $105,807 in investigative costs, and $440,000 in attorney fees. The judgment closed a landmark case in San Francisco’s effort to enforce building safety and hold violators accountable.

A major California labor dispute ended with a $5.1 million class action settlement against the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). Plaintiffs, led by Jacqueline Carreon and others, alleged the State systematically violated wage and hour laws by denying rest and meal breaks to correctional staff. The lawsuit claimed the CDCR’s internal policies forced employees to remain on duty during breaks, resulting in unpaid time and stress. Following years of litigation and negotiation, the State agreed to resolve the case in July 2025, marking one of the largest wage and hour settlements against a California agency.

The personal injury case of Cook v. City of San Diego concluded with a $75,000 out-of-court settlement.2 Plaintiff Rakewon Emmanuel Cook alleged that the City’s failure to maintain safe public property, despite having prior knowledge of a hazard, caused him serious injuries and resulting financial losses. The City had consistently denied wrongdoing and raised defenses, including the plaintiff's own negligence, but ultimately agreed to the payout to avoid the expense and uncertainty of a jury trial over the liability claims.

A civil lawsuit stemming from a 2021 traffic collision involving a Los Angeles Police Department employee concluded with a $460,000 settlement. Plaintiff Rosa Becerra sued the City of Los Angeles, the LAPD, and employee Yesenia Emestica, alleging negligence caused the crash that left her seriously injured and unable to work. Filed in March 2023, the case focused on the City’s liability under respondeat superior. After months of negotiation, the City Council approved the payout, finalizing the settlement in July 2024 and closing the case before trial.

A seven-year legal battle over unpaid wages and labor code violations at Los Angeles International Airport ended with a $1.5 million settlement. Former employees James Miller, Ashley Leon, and Damesha Christopher led a class action against LS & Partners CA LLC and related Paradies Lagardère entities. They alleged the companies failed to provide proper meal and rest breaks, issue accurate wage statements, and pay final wages on time. The Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, approved the settlement in March 2025, bringing financial relief to hundreds of airport retail and food service workers.