Case details
Police misconduct investigator fired for making complaints: suit
SUMMARY
$736000
Amount
Verdict-Plaintiff
Result type
Not present
Ruling
KEYWORDS
emotional distress, mental, psychological
FACTS
In September 2006, plaintiff Thomas Gonzales, 59, a civilian constitutional-rights investigator for the Citizens’ Police Complaint Commission, was terminated from his position. The Citizen Police Complaint Commission was established in 1990 by a vote of the citizens of Long Beach after a particularly violent racial profiling and beating incident allegedly occurred by the Long Beach Police Department. The charter amendment that established the commission empowered it to receive and independently investigate citizen complaints of misconduct against Long Beach police officers. Special review emphasis was placed on allegations of excessive force and false arrest, as well as complaints with racial or sexual overtones. However, after a former police officer became Gonzales’ supervisor in 2004, Gonzales noted a series of changes made in his operation of the commission that he claimed resulted in discrimination against the Hispanic community. As a result, Gonzales made a series of complaints to his new supervisor and others up the chain of command, alleging that the complaints filed by Hispanics against the Long Beach Police Department were not being properly or “independently” investigated pursuant to the mandate of the city charter. He claimed that Hispanic citizens’ complaints were being summarily marked “no further action,” altered by the police department and his new supervisor, and, sometimes, entirely discarded. He claimed that those actions prevented the serious complaints contemplated by the charter from being honestly evaluated by the commission. Gonzales was terminated from his position in September 2006. He was told that the results of an internal investigation found that he and his wife, a paralegal, were not being truthful when engaging in a for-profit contact with a citizen that they met while the citizen was filing a complaint with the commission through Gonzales. Gonzales claimed that his termination was due to his complaints about discrimination against the Hispanic community. Gonzales sued the city of Long Beach and the Citizen Police Complaint Commission, alleging race discrimination, a violation of the Whistleblower Protection Act, failure to accommodate, violation of the Family Medical Leave Act, and retaliation. The trial court dismissed four out of five causes of action on summary judgment, and the matter continued to trial on Gonzales’ retaliation claim under FEHA only. On April 3, 2013, the jury rendered a full defense verdict. However, Gonzales filed an appeal with the Second District Court of Appeal on the grounds of erroneous dismissal of the whistleblower cause of action on summary judgment, prejudicial selection of improper jury instructions, prejudicial exclusion of retaliation evidence, and other issues. In 2016, the Court of Appeal reversed the granting of summary judgment as to Gonzales’ cause of action for whistleblower retaliation under California Labor Code § 1102.5, and the matter proceeded to a new trial on the whistleblower retaliation cause of action. During the new trial, Gonzales claimed that, prior to his termination, he was pressured to not investigate alleged police misconduct in cases in an attempt to prevent his findings from being included in the official statistics reported to the city council, the public, and the Department of Justice. He claimed that when he complained about the new executive director’s alleged attempts to hide citizen complaints against the police, the director attempted to have him removed from his position. Gonzales further claimed that when he continued to complain about citizen complaints against the police not being investigated, city officials hired an independent investigative agency to find misconduct on him so that he could be terminated. Defense counsel argued that Gonzales was terminated for violating the city’s code of ethics. Counsel contended that the investigation included a citizen complaint made at a city public meeting in May 2006, during which the citizen claimed that Gonzales was charging her for the services of the commission. Defense counsel contended that the city investigated the citizen’s allegations and that it uncovered that Gonzales had converted an on-the-job contact with the citizen into a for-profit relationship through his wife. After meeting Gonzales at the commission, the citizen entered into a contract with Gonzales’ wife for her to provide her legal assistance with a lawsuit she intended to file against her former employer. After the investigation’s findings were received, the city made the decision to terminate Mr. Gonzales for his apparent conflict of interest and conversion of an on-the-job contact into a for-profit relationship. In response, plaintiff’s counsel argued that Gonzales’ wife was providing legal services to the citizen in an unrelated case against a car company and that neither Mr. Gonzales nor his wife received any compensation for the wife’s provision of services, which was done during the course of her services within League of United Latin American Citizens, of which the citizen was a member and Gonzales was president., Gonzales worked in his position since 1999. He claimed he received excellent reviews the first five years of his employment, specifically regarding his investigative work. However, he was terminated from his position in September 2006, resulting in a loss of earnings. Gonzales also claimed the retaliation caused him to suffer from emotional distress. The plaintiff’s psychology expert testified that he found, to a reasonable degree of psychiatric probability, that Gonzales developed a depressive disorder arising from his termination, which would fulfill the criteria for adjustment disorder with depressed mood. Gonzales sought recovery of emotional distress damages and economic damages.
COURT
Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Long Beach, CA
Similar Cases
Negligent tire repair caused serious rollover crash: family
AMOUNT:
$375,000
CASE RESULT:
Plaintiff won
CATEGORY:
Personal Injury
Steep, winding road caused multiple truck crashes: plaintiffs
AMOUNT:
$32,500,000
CASE RESULT:
Plaintiff won
CATEGORY:
Personal Injury
Dangerous highway caused fatal multiple vehicle crash: suit
AMOUNT:
$18,681,052
CASE RESULT:
Plaintiff won
CATEGORY:
Personal Injury
Applicant claimed future care needed after fall from roof
AMOUNT:
$3,500,000
CASE RESULT:
Plaintiff won
CATEGORY:
Personal Injury
Roofer claimed he needs future care after fall from roof
AMOUNT:
$6,000,000
CASE RESULT:
Plaintiff won
INJURIES:
- anxiety
- brain
- brain damage
- brain injury
- cognition
- depression
- epidural
- extradural hematoma
- face
- facial bone
- fracture
- head
- headaches
- hearing
- impairment
- insomnia
- loss of
- mental
- nose
- psychological
- scapula
- sensory
- shoulder
- skull
- speech
- subdural hematoma
- tinnitus
- traumatic brain injury
- vision
- Show More
- Show Less
CATEGORY:
Personal Injury
Plaintiff: Improperly trained delivery personnel caused injuries
AMOUNT:
$4,875,000
CASE RESULT:
Plaintiff won
CATEGORY:
Personal Injury