On Dec. 1, 2009, plaintiff Mark Kenyon, a vice president of operations at Stoneway Properties, a division of Applied Technologies Associates Inc. in Paso Robles, was terminated from his position. Kenyon claimed he was terminated due to baseless complaints and a biased investigation. Kenyon sued Applied Technologies Associates Inc., alleging age discrimination, defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and breach of an implied employment contract. Kenyon voluntarily dismissed the defamation claim after Applied Technologies filed a demurrer asking the court to dismiss it. The court later granted Applied Technologies’ motion for summary adjudication as to Kenyon’s claims of age discrimination and intentional infliction of emotional distress, finding that no facts existed to support those claims. Thus, the only cause of action that was tried was on Kenyon’s claim of breach of an implied employment contract. In 2009, Applied Technologies’ Founder and President, Donald Van Steenwyk, who Kenyon reported directly to for many years, passed away. As a result, Van Steenwyk’s wife inherited the company. After taking over, Mrs. Van Steenwyk relied upon new officers, none of whom had ever served the late Mr. Van Steenwyk. Kenyon claimed that sometime thereafter, a probationary employee filed a meritless claim against him with the new management, alleging hostile workplace harassment. Kenyon claimed that unbeknownst to him, Applied Technologies’ corporate counsel then started a biased investigation and interviewed numerous employees, who allegedly brought up baseless personal grievances against him. However, he alleged that he was never allowed to know of the complaints or to respond to them, and that he only learned of the process at a 10-minute meeting with Applied Technologies’ corporate counsel at a local Starbucks coffee shop, where he was given an employee warning notice. In addition, Kenyon claimed that despite having just been given the warning notice the day before, he was suspended before returning to work the next day and, shortly thereafter, was fired without ever being given the opportunity to learn of the charges against him or to respond to those alleged charges. Kenyon claimed that he had 28 years of experience, an exemplary work record, and received consistent raises and numerous performance bonuses throughout his employment. He also claimed his company personnel record was unblemished, with no previous written complaints, prior to the termination. Kenyon further claimed that he only heard of the accusations against him through the subject lawsuit. The plaintiff’s employment/workplace investigations expert testified as to the inadequacy of the company’s investigation of the alleged complaints against Kenyon. Defense counsel disputed Kenyon’s claim of having an unblemished work record, as evidence was introduced regarding prior workplace issues that resulted in a reassignment of subordinate staff and counseling. Counsel contended that after Applied Technologies received a complaint that Kenyon had allegedly harassed a subordinate employee, whom he was supervising, it investigated the complaint and found that Kenyon had a history and pattern of subordinate abuse and mistreatment. Thus, counsel contended that Kenyon was terminated for legitimate reasons. Defense counsel further contended that Kenyon’s termination was lawful because he was an at-will employee and that Applied Technologies could terminate him for any reason, or no reason, at all. Counsel noted that Kenyon had also signed two express writings indicating his employment was “at-will.” Defense counsel argued that even if Kenyon’s argument was true that Applied Technologies had impliedly promised to only terminate him for good cause, it did have good cause to terminate him based on its investigation into the harassment complaint against him, which substantiated that Kenyon had a pattern of subordinate abuse and mistreatment of at least three subordinate employees. Defense counsel also argued that the investigation was conducted in good faith, and that the investigation was reasonable under the circumstances, that Applied Technologies confronted Kenyon with the allegation against him, and that it allowed Kenyon a reasonable chance to respond to the allegation over the course of a two-week investigation span, during which time Kenyon failed to submit a written response, as he indicated he would do., Kenyon sought recovery of damages exceeding $1.6 million for his lost wages and benefits.