 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Rivas-Smith v. Los Angeles County9/29/2005
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
INTRODUCTION
Defendants and respondents County of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (Sheriff's Department), and Deputy John Fernandez (Deputy Fernandez) (collectively defendants) obtained summary judgment against plaintiff and appellant Daysi Rivas-Smith (plaintiff), who filed a complaint seeking damages for discrimination, harassment, and retaliation she allegedly suffered during her employment at, and in her termination from, the Sheriff's Department. Judgment was granted on the ground that plaintiff failed to judicially challenge the Los Angeles County Civil Service Commission's (Commission) administrative decision that found her termination was appropriate. Plaintiff argues on appeal that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment. Because plaintiff failed to meet her obligation to judicially challenge the Commission's decision, she is bound by its finding that her termination was appropriate and, therefore, her claim that she was terminated for discriminatory and retaliatory reasons and not for an appropriate reason necessarily fails. The Commission's decision did not address plaintiff's claim that, apart from her termination, she was harassed at work because of her, and her husband's, race and, therefore, the Commission's decision as to her termination is not binding on her subsequent action for harassment except to the extent that the grounds for termination (the issues related to plaintiff's deficient job performance and defendants' responses thereto) are the basis for the harassment claim. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment as to plaintiff's claims for discriminatory and retaliatory discharge and reverse the judgment as to plaintiff's claim for harassment.
BACKGROUND
In 1997, plaintiff began working for the Sheriff's Department as a court services specialist. Plaintiff's primary function was to serve legal process and, when required, to testify in court about such service.
Deputy Fernandez was one of plaintiff's supervisors. According to plaintiff, Deputy Fernandez was unreasonably critical of her due to her race and her husband's race. Plaintiff is part Black and part Hispanic. Plaintiff's husband is Black.
According to plaintiff, Deputy Fernandez and other employees made racially biased statements in her presence. Deputy Fernandez allegedly harassed her by, among other things, checking up on her; verifying if she was really sick when she took sick leave; not allowing her son to participate in "bring your child to work day"; threatening to write her up when she requested time off to care for her sick daughter, and then reprimanding her when she left her daughter home alone; and falsely accusing her of conducting personal business during company time.
Deputy Fernandez also allegedly imposed work conditions on plaintiff that he did not impose on other, non-Black employees in her position. For example, Deputy Fernandez closely scrutinized plaintiff's log book, and he modified her schedule so that she could only go to the office at the beginning and end of the day which did not allow her sufficient time to complete her work. Plaintiff reported Deputy Fernandez's treatment to his superiors.
In July 2000, plaintiff received a performance evaluation that rated her as "Improvement Needed." The stated reasons for her evaluation included
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 California Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|