Employment - A Record of Success

The Employment Law Group has been involved in a number of high profile trials and appeals, but the Group has an equally accomplished motion practice. It is the Group’s philosophy that effective representation at trial is often the product of an effective pre-trial practice. In some cases, strategically planned and well-crafted motions resolve the case before trial. In others, motions pare down the issues to be tried and allow for the strategic removal (or inclusion) of portions of the case which may assist a jury in rendering a verdict in the client’s favor. The Group has frequently been successful in disposing of entire cases on summary judgment, saving thousands of dollars in legal fees and time for clients. Below is a synopsis of some of our recent successes.

Trials

Judgment For: Gordon & Rees Employment Group

Like all litigators, the attorneys in G&R's Employment Group enjoy going to trial. But equally important to the Employment Group's success and reputation in the community is its ability to get cases dismissed before trial, thereby avoiding significant litigation costs for its clients. Here is a sampling of dispositive rulings in favor of Employment Group clients:

• Motion for summary judgment granted in a First Amendment retaliation case in the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division
• Motion for summary judgment granted in a disability discrimination and failure to accommodate case in San Francisco Superior Court
• Motion for summary judgment granted in a First Amendment retaliation and disability discrimination case in the Northern District of California, Oakland Division
• Motion for summary judgment granted in a national origin discrimination case in the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division
• Demurrer sustained without leave to amend in a disability discrimination case in San Francisco Superior Court
• Motion for summary judgment granted in student-on-student rape case in the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division
• Lawsuit abandoned by plaintiff following demurrer sustained with leave to amend in conspiracy to deny federal rights case in San Francisco Superior Court

Employment Practice Group Garners Another Defense Jury Verdict for University of California

After a nine day trial in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Michael Bruno and Marcie Isom obtained a complete defense verdict in another high profile disability discrimination case. This time, Gordon & Rees represented longtime client the Regents of the University of California (Boalt Hall School of Law and the University of California, Berkeley).

The plaintiff, a former student at Boalt Hall School of Law, has various mobility and vision impairments. He sued the University and two deans alleging they discriminated against him on the basis of his disability by failing to provide him enlarged print materials in a timely manner as an accommodation for his disability. The case involved untested and complicated interactions between California’s Unruh Act and the ADA.

Mr. Bruno and Ms. Isom successfully argued the University’s attempts to accommodate plaintiff, including offering him a host of alternate accommodations and ultimately spending hundreds of hours and over $160,000 for larger materials, were sufficient to satisfy even an “unintentional discrimination” standard. On the defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law, the court dismissed the individual defendants on the basis of insufficient evidence. The jury deliberated for less than an hour.

Gordon & Rees Successfully Defends University of California in Employment Action

Employment Group Partner, Michael Lucey, recently won a major victory and obtained a defense verdict in a protracted employment case against the University of California at Davis in Federal District Court in Sacramento.

The plaintiff, a former graduate student, sued the university after failing to obtain a Ph.D. She alleged gender discrimination and harassment. She also sued her former professor individually for breach of fiduciary duty. The University brought a counterclaim for conversion of the research data that was not returned and for interference with a contract with NASA.

The case was first tried last year and Gordon & Rees won a defense verdict and successfully prosecuted the counter claim on behalf of the University. The plaintiff won a nominal amount on the breach of fiduciary claim against her professor. However, the court granted Mike's motion for a new trial on this part of the verdict. The jury then returned a defense verdict in the re-trial, providing a complete victory for the University and the professor.

Gordon & Rees Employment Group Wins Defense Jury Verdict In Wrongful Termination Case

Steve Ronk and Lisa Garner from the Los Angeles Employment Group successfully defended a non-profit family resource center under contract with the City of Huntington Beach against wrongful termination, discrimination, and retaliation claims. The Plaintiff, a 48 year old woman, accepted a position to oversee the operations of the Center, but was terminated after nine months of employment for poor performance.

Plaintiff claimed that during her employment, there was mold in the Center that was making her ill. She further alleged the Center was located in a high crime area and security was inadequate to protect her and others in the Center.

Plaintiff filed suit against the center and two individual managers alleging discrimination for her physical disability (mold allergy); failure to accommodate her condition; age and gender discrimination; retaliation and wrongful termination based on her complaints about health and safety issues. Plaintiff also alleged the center believed she was about to file a workers’ compensation claim. Plaintiff sought compensatory damages of $600,000 and punitive damages.

After three and a half weeks of trial, the Court granted nonsuit and directed verdict motions for the center on plaintiff’s claims for age and gender discrimination and retaliation. The matter was submitted to the jury on plaintiff’s claims for disability discrimination, failure to accommodate a disability, and wrongful termination in violation of public policy. After only two hours of deliberation, the jury returned defense verdicts on all causes of action.

Gordon & Rees Wins Another Jury Verdict for University of California

Michael Laurenson, a partner in Gordon & Rees' San Francisco Employment Group, received a defense verdict on behalf of the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) following a two-week jury trial. The plaintiff, formerly a psychiatrist at San Francisco General Hospital, alleged his employment termination was in retaliation for complaints he made after a patient he had discharged committed suicide. Mr. Laurenson presented UCSF witnesses who testified the decision to terminate the plaintiff was made several months before his first complaint. The jury agreed.

The Gordon & Rees Employment group has successfully defended the University of California in matters of alleged harassment, job retaliation, wrongful termination, and discrimination. This is the 5th consecutive jury trial win for the Employment Group over the last few years.

• Defense verdict following a 9 day jury trial in a high profile disability discrimination case against the Regents of the University of California. The jury deliberated for less than an hour.

• Defense verdict following a two week jury trial in a wrongful termination and retaliation case.

• Defense verdict after a 2 ½ week trial in a gender discrimination case involving wrongful termination in violation of Fair Employment and Housing Act, violation of Equal Pay Act, and wrongful termination in violation of public policy.
  

• Defense verdict after a three week trial in a breach of employment contract and wrongful termination case.

• Defense verdict after a three week trial on a race discrimination and retaliation claim under the Fair Employment Housing Act. The jury deliberated only two hours.

• Defense verdict after a four week trial in a gender discrimination case under the Fair Employment and Housing Act.

• Defense verdict after a two week trial on a race discrimination in housing claim under the Fair Employment and Housing Act.

• Defense verdict after a three week trial in gender discrimination and sexual harassment case with allegations of attempted rape by a co-employee.

• Defense verdict after two week trial in race discrimination and racial harassment/hostile environment case. Jury deliberated 45 minutes.

• Defense verdict after three week trial of a tenure dispute involving claims of gender and ethnicity/ national origin discrimination by a university professor. This result followed a successful summary judgment motion which resulted in dismissal of the individual defendant and removal of any potential for punitive damages.

• Defense verdict on all discrimination claims in a Title IX gender discrimination case.

• Nonsuit during trial in a wrongful termination case.

Appeals

• Gordon & Rees won reversal of a $1.6 million sexual harassment and battery jury verdict in a case where an employer had spanked its employees, including the plaintiff. (Gordon & Rees was not trial counsel in this case.) (Orlando v. Alarm One, Inc. (2008) WL 115833.)
  
  
• The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the District Court’s granting of summary judgment in favor of Gordon & Rees’ client, where plaintiff alleged sexual harassment under the paramour theory and violation of the Equal Pay Act.

• In a published opinion, the California Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's dismissal of all of the plaintiff's claims on demurrer, including claims for age discrimination, overtime pay and breach of contract (Kim v. Regents of the University of California, 80 Cal. App. 4th 160, 2000).

• The state trial court granted summary judgment, but then granted plaintiff's motion for reconsideration and reversed its original ruling in a gender discrimination and sexual harassment case. The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court and affirmed summary judgment.

• The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the District Court's granting of summary judgment in favor of Gordon & Rees' client in a case brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Rehabilitation Act (Voytek v. The Regents of the University of California (1996) 77 F.3d 491).

• State Court of Appeal upheld summary judgment on allegations of racial discrimination, harassment and fraud.

Motions

• Summary judgment granted in multi-plaintiff reverse race and age discrimination case (Howard v. Regents of the University of California, 2000 WL 424192 (N.D.Ca. April 12, 2000)).

• Summary judgment granted in suit alleging retaliation for opposing race discrimination and related claims (Santa Clara Superior Court).

• Summary judgment granted in suit alleging discrimination and harassment based on age, disability and medical condition (San Francisco Superior Court).

• Summary judgment granted by Northern District Federal Court on a failure to provide accommodations in employment claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act. (Voytek v. The Regents of the University of California, 1994 WL 478805).

• Summary judgment granted in a Title IX discrimination and harassment case (Northern District Federal Court).

• University professor's constitutional law claims dismissed in a case involving issues of free speech and academic freedom (Northern District Federal Court).

• Summary judgment granted in case involving claims of discrimination and harassment based on race and gender (Alameda Superior Court).

• Summary judgment granted in former employee's claims for negligent and intentional misrepresentation (Santa Clara Superior Court).