EMPLOYMENT

Six employees working as servers at a restaurant were terminated after the restaurant was sold to a new owner. The workers were all over 65 years of age and claimed that their termination was based on their age as evidenced, in part, by the subsequent hiring of new, younger, attractive employees.

Plaintiff, a County of Orange Probation Department, with a congenital hand deformity, assigned to a Juvenile Correction facility claimed to have suffered harassment based on disability, retaliation and constructive termination as the result of derogatory comments (the majority of which were posted on an internet blog allegedly by co-employees) and treatment from co-employees. Plaintiff sued his fellow employees and the county which he claimed failed to prevent harassment under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA; Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.

High level female employee of market research company brought claims for gender discrimination and harassment, including failure to promote provide opportunities equal to male executive employees.

An Assistant Sheriff was released from her “At Will” employment position with the County Sheriff’s Department in the aftermath of a Grand Jury investigation of an inmate’s murder at one of the County’s Jail facilities. The plaintiff sued the Orange Sheriff’s Department as well as the acting Sheriff, a County Supervisor, the County’s District Attorney, two deputy district attorneys as well as additional sworn personnel from the Sheriff’s Department. The plaintiff claimed that her release constituted a violation of her Civil Rights based on Equal Protection and Due Process grounds, and a violation of her rights under the Peace Officers Bill of Rights. She additionally claimed discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Orange County Sheriff’s deputy claimed to a have suffered retaliation from employer following his alleged exercise of his first amendment right to free speech based on his raising safety concerns regarding the Sheriff’s Department Air Support Bureau.

Plaintiffs brought four separate cases against their employer, a private ambulance company. Each individual was a former employee suing the company (and in some cases their co-plaintiff’s) and a management employee of the entity, for a variety of employment related claims, including sexual harassment, discrimination based on gender, age and disability and wrongful termination. The complicated and interlocking claims were ultimately resolved in four different settlements

Six employees of County Environmental Health Department sued County of Orange and two supervisors claiming discrimination and harassment based on gender and retaliation. Their claims ranged from failure to promote to wrong wrongful termination.

Plaintiff, a supervising deputy coroner claimed that she suffered discrimination and harassment based on gender and sexual orientation and retaliation following complaints of said alleged mistreatment.

A female deputy sheriff sued the county and her co-employees claiming a hostile work environment caused by male supervisors discussing their sexual exploits in the far east. Plaintiff also sued for retaliation and failure to accommodate her disability.

Plaintiff sued Sheriff’s department for disability discrimination and for failure to accommodate his disability, severe myopia, which could be corrected to 20/20 with soft contact lenses. At the time of the plaintiff’s application the Sheriff’s Department would not hire employees who required soft contact levels to correct vision to 20/20 due to concerns that the deputy’s vision could be compromised by gases or fumes and/or become dislodged in combat or other physical circumstances.

Twelve plaintiffs, former and current deputies of the Orange County Sheriff’s Department claimed that their employer breached an implied in fact contract to promote them to a higher rank and to a particular assignment. The county denied the existence of an implied in fact contract to promote.

Lawsuit by a Deputy District Attorney who claimed that he was terminated in violation of Public Policy as a “whistle blower” because he complained of “lack of accountability” as well as inefficiency in the operation of the District Attorney’s Office

Public employee found unfit for duty due to apparent mental breakdown and placed off work following denial of her application for a disability retirement. Plaintiff brought a Petition for Writ of Mandate pursuant to Government Code section 31725 claiming an entitlement to reinstatement and back pay for the time period she was not working for the County.

Plaintiff, an on-site property manager of an apartment complex sued the owner of the property for wrongful termination as wells as wrongful eviction which she claimed was based on her age and her disability.

Plaintiff, a female deputy District Attorney sued the former District Attorney, two Assistant District Attorneys and a deputy District Attorney claiming discrimination based on race, gender and marital status and retaliation for allegedly protesting unlawful conduct. During the course of the lawsuit, a second lawsuit was filed by the husband of the deputy district attorney. The husband, the Chief Deputy Attorney, was released from his at will executive position following alleged improprieties. The husband claimed that his firing was premised on his assistance in wife’s lawsuit.

Action brought by employee of tile installation company for alleged wage and hour irregularities and for wrongful termination and retaliation following alleged complaints pertaining to wage and hour violations.

Plaintiff, a probationary employee, claimed discrimination based on his race (black) and national origin (Ghana) when he failed to earn a permanent position with the County’s Children’s Home which operated as a 24-hour emergency shelter care facility, for children who have been abused, abandoned, and/or neglected. Plaintiff claimed harassment and constructive termination following receipt of a note which contained racial slurs and a death threat.

Plaintiff, a Human Resources manager by a private company brought a FEHA claim for wrongful discharge based on gender after her release from employment. Defendant claimed that the termination was due to plaintiff’s dereliction of her duties and her practice of favoritism regarding employees she supervised.

Plaintiff, a long-term county employee working in the public works department. The plaintiff had a long history of employment deficiencies and warnings and corrective action. The plaintiff claimed that his termination was based on his age and his ethnicity Plaintiff also claimed harassment from his supervisor and co-employees including his supervisor spitting into a sink where the employee was washing his hands.