Nov 22, 2017 Tips from the Table
Use of Supposals, Packaged Supposals & Proposals

Use of Supposals, Packaged Supposals & Proposals

Nov 21, 2017 Education Matters

Appellate Court Upholds Jury Verdict for Officer Claiming FEHA Retaliation

A federal appellate court affirmed a jury verdict in favor of three police officers of Latino descent (“Officers”) who sued the City of Westminster (“City”) and its current and former Police Department Chiefs (“Chiefs”).  The lead plaintiff, Officer Jose Flores, claimed that the City and Chiefs violated the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) when they discriminated against him because of his race and national origin and retaliated against him by denying him special assignments.  The other Officers made similar claims and the jury found in the Officers’ favor.  The City and Chiefs then asserted that Flores failed to prove his retaliation claim and requested a new trial.  

Nov 21, 2017 Education Matters

Stipulated Judgment Must Bear Reasonable Relationship To The Amount Of Anticipated Damages

Vitatech International, Inc. (“Vitatech”) and National Marketing, Inc. (“NMI”) entered into a contract for Vitatech to manufacture certain products for NMI.  In 2011, Vitatech sued NMI and its related entities (collectively, the “NMI Defendants”).  Vitatech alleged the NMI Defendants breached the contract by failing to pay $166,000 for products Vitatech had manufactured for them.  Vitatech’s lawsuit sought $166,000 in compensatory damages, plus interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs.

Nov 21, 2017 Education Matters

Boss’ Son-in-Law Could Not Prove Marital Status Discrimination or Failure to Investigate

The case involved claims by Orlando Nakai (Orlando), who was employed by Friendship House Association of American Indians, Inc. (Friendship House), a drug and alcohol rehabilitation program.  Nakai’s wife, Karen Nakai (Karen), was also an employee of Friendship House.  The program’s CEO, Helen Waukazoo (Helen) was Orlando’s mother-in-law. 

Nov 21, 2017 Education Matters

Correctional Officers Could Not Pursue Discrimination Claims in Court After Loss at WCAB

The California Court of Appeal found that an employee may be legally barred from bringing claims under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) in a trial court if the legal issues are identical to issues that have already been heard and decided in proceedings before the California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB).

Nov 21, 2017 Education Matters

California Supreme Court to Decide Whether Law Enforcement Agencies May Share Names of Officers on Employing Department’s “Brady List” With Prosecution Agencies Absent a Court Order Granting a Pitchess Motion

On October 11, 2017, the California Supreme Court agreed to review an appellate court decision which found that the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (Department) is prohibited from making “Brady alerts” to prosecution agencies.  That is, the State Supreme Court will review a decision by which held that the Department was prohibited from sharing the names of officers on the Department’s “Brady list” with prosecutors absent a court order granting what is commonly called a “Pitchess motion.”