PAGA Manageability

The courts have reached contrary decisions on whether judges have discretion to dismiss representative PAGA cases on “manageability” grounds, similar to the standard applied in class actions. In Wesson v. Staples the Office Supply Superstore, LLC (2021) 68 Cal.App.5th 746, one Court of Appeal held that trial courts have inherent authority to ensure PAGA claims are manageable at trial, and to strike representative PAGA claims if necessary. The opposite conclusion was reached by another Court of Appeal in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc. (2022) 76 Cal.App.5th 685, where the Court disagreed with Wesson and held PAGA claims cannot be dismissed on manageability grounds.  The Ninth Circuit weighed in in Hamilton v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (9th Cir. 2022) 39 F.4th 575, and similarly ruled PAGA claims cannot be dismissed on manageability grounds. The Ninth Circuit’s decision is binding in cases filed in federal court, but is not binding on state court judges. The California Supreme Court recently accepted review in the Estrada case, and will have the final word on the manageability issue.