In September 2014, plaintiff Keela Castle, 62, a Black electronics communication technician, started working for the Sheriff’s Communications Center in the Internal Services Department of Los Angeles County. She claimed that from the time of her hiring, she was subjected to age, race and gender discrimination and that she was retaliated against for complaining about the discrimination. Castle sued her former supervisor, Adam Woods, and her employer, the county of Los Angeles. Castle alleged that the defendants’ actions constituted racial, age and gender discrimination violations of the Fair Employment and Housing Act; retaliation; and discrimination and retaliation in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981. According to Castle, at the time of her hire, there were six other technicians, none of whom were Black and all of whom were male. She also stated that only one of the other technicians was in his 60s, while the others were in their 40s. Castle alleged that, prior to her beginning work for the county, Woods shared personal information about her with other employees in the department, specifically regarding her age, race and gender. She also alleged that Woods falsely stated that she was there to spy on the other employees and the department and that she had been placed there by top executives to obtain information to destroy the center. Castle claimed that as a result, she was alienated by her co-workers. Castle also alleged that Woods subjected her to discriminatory behavior that he did not impart on the six employees who were hired after her, such as telling her that she could only sit in a chair at a desk and read 246 volumes of installation instructions involving equipment at the center. She also alleged that Woods told her that the only other things she could do was shadow her co-workers or to use the restroom. Woods also allegedly told Castle that she was not allowed to walk around, read anything other than installation instructions, get a personal computer, talk on a cell phone or change her shift time. Castle asserted that none of the other new hires were told those things, noting that none of the other new hires were Black females or over the age of 60. Castle also claimed that Woods instituted a new rule preventing her from working overtime for the first two years of her employment, although that rule was not applied to any of the non-Black male employees. In addition, Castle claimed that Woods was fixated on her age and repeatedly told her that he did not want her working at the center, reminding her that he did not hire her. Castle complained about Woods’ alleged discrimination on Oct. 16, 2017, but her complaints were dismissed and a human resources representative would only discuss the overtime issue. Castle claimed that after she filed her complaint, in November 2017, Woods took away all of her holidays after she was in her new shift for only five months, even though the non-Black male who had the shift before her for 18 years did not have his holidays taken away. Beginning in July 2018, Woods was no longer Castle’s supervisor. However, Castle claimed that Woods was given a better position and transferred to another department, while she was passed over for job opportunities for which she was qualified, excluded from meetings and activities, and continued to be retaliated against by being reprimanded and yelled at by other supervisors and co-workers. Woods denied Castle’s allegations against him. Defense counsel asserted affirmative defenses, including statute of limitations and failure to prove discriminatory intent., Castle claimed she suffered emotional distress as a result of the discrimination and retaliation. She also claimed she suffered a loss of pay from what she would have earned from overtime and/or from the other job opportunities for which she was passed over. Castle sought recovery of lost earnings and damages for her emotional pain and suffering.