In September or October 2008, plaintiff Paul Metoyer, 58, an African-American male employed as a Regional Project Management Director in the Department of Existing Facilities in the Los Angeles Unified School District, allegedly began to be subjected to an ongoing course of discrimination on the basis of his race and his association with other African-Americans. Metoyer previously filed litigation against the school district for discrimination and testified in actions brought by coworkers who were also claiming discrimination. In September or October 2008, he began complaining to human resources, management personnel and the Office of Inspector General that the district was involved in several improper activities that violated state or federal laws, amounting to economic waste, gross misconduct, incompetency and inefficiency. He contended that shortly after he made his disclosures, the district began retaliating against him. He was ultimately terminated on Jan. 31, 2010. Metoyer the Los Angeles Unified School District. Metoyer alleged that the district’s actions constituted discrimination, retaliation and wrongful termination. Metoyer contended that as a result of his disclosures and participation in the other complaints, as well as his filing of the previous litigation, the school district began to retaliate against him, ultimately resulting in the termination of his employment. He claimed that in September or October 2008, he complained that the district was wasting funding marked for school improvements, resulting in the extensions of projects and exhaustion of funds before the work needed to be done. He also claimed that complained about the district dismantling the Job Order Contracting program, a district mandated program intended to insure that minority-operated contractors were used by the district, and complained about the district providing a misleading report that indicated that new school sites had been completed when, in fact, those projects remained unfinished and would require millions of dollars to complete. He further claimed he complained about the district creating a hostile work environment for district employees who spoke out against wasting fraud. In addition, Metoyer claimed that he complained about the district committing gross violations of federal, state, city and county public works codes and regulations, as well as misleading board members by submitting false reports of work done properly when funds had been wasted were planning was unnecessary. He contended that as a result of his disclosures, the district engaged in the same conduct that served as the basis of his discrimination claims. Thus, Metoyer alleged that after he brought his complaints about the district’s improper activities in September or October 2008, the district began to discriminate against him by threatening to not promote him unless he ignored or acquiesced in wrongful government activity. He also alleged that in January 2009, upper management used misleading information that resulted in a recommendation that he be terminated. Metoyer claimed that in early 2009, the district falsely asserted that that he was not properly performing his duties and began making false claims to management, including stating that he was not working appropriate hours, causing him to be wrongfully subjected to a skelly hearing based on false charges. He alleged that the district staff began excluding him from meetings and work-related social events, and otherwise failed to provide him with information that he needed to do his job. He also alleged that he was wrongfully denied promotions or denied the opportunity for a promotion in 2009 by the district manipulating the qualifications for certain positions. Metoyer further alleged that he was denied medical leave, was not accommodated for his disability, and was wrongfully denied a transfer. In addition, Metoyer claimed the district began redirecting work away from him, isolating him at work, and limiting his responsibilities without justification in order to justify him not getting promoted. He further claimed that the district began to threaten to discipline him on false or unwarranted grounds, as well as threaten to terminate him or eliminate his position, and made false accusations against him so that he would be placed under investigation by the Office of Inspector General. Metoyer contended that the district ultimately retaliated against him by wrongfully terminating him. Defense counsel argued that the school district’s reduction in the force was a legitimate non-discriminatory reason to eliminate the Regional Project Management Director position. Counsel contended that several races other than African-American were impacted by the reduction in force and that Metoyer’s past involvement in other lawsuits played no role in the district’s decision to eliminate the Regional Project Management Director position. Moreover, counsel contended that the decision-makers were not aware of Metoyer’s past litigation activities. Before the case was submitted to a jury, defense counsel moved for a directed verdict on the Educating Code and the Bane Act claims, claiming that the Education Code was not applicable to Metoyer because he was a management employee and that there were no facts presented at trial to support the Bane Act cause of action. Judge Terry Green ultimately granted a directed verdict in favor of the district on the Educating Code and Bane Act claims., Metoyer claimed he suffered emotional distress, anxiety, frustration, loss of self-esteem, and depression as a result of the school district’s actions. Thus, Metoyer sought recovery of non-economic damages for his emotional distress, anxiety, frustration, loss of self-esteem, and depression. He also sought recovery of economic damages in the form of lost wages, lost benefits, and future loss of income and benefits. Defense counsel argued that Metoyer’s emotional were based on his work-related injury, which was covered by workers’ compensation. Counsel also argued that Metoyer suffered no economic losses because he indicated that he was unable to work and had taken a disability retirement.