Jesse J. Maddox

Though his employment defense firm has branched out into representing nonprofits and hospitals, Maddox still specializes in working for governmental entities.

Aggrieved public sector employees face higher administrative hurdles than their private sector counterparts, he said, but have a key edge if they can get in front of a jury.

"We're representing the man," said the partner in Liebert Cassidy Whitmore's Fresno and Sacramento offices. "There's a lot of distrust out there of government."

This is a problem Maddox said has gotten worse in recent years. In response, he said, they must focus on "humanizing" their witnesses so jurors don't just focus on the "faceless" government entity.

"If someone sees this is an actual person making decisions the best that they can, that's really the best way to overcome that perception," Maddox said.

That's on top of the standard disadvantage employers always face in court, he added.

"We start off with the scales tipped against us when it goes before a jury," Maddox said. "Not only because most jury members identify with a plaintiff because everyone's been an employee. We usually don't get managers on a jury."

Having litigated more than 100 employment cases, Maddox has compiled a strong record of pushing those scales back into balance. He successfully defended the city of Stockton against a lawsuit by a former high-level employee in 2017. Glynn v. City of Stockton, 15-CV00529 (E.D. Cal., filed March 9, 2015).

The city fired its manager of the Office of Violence Prevention after just four months -- and while she was eight months pregnant. A whistleblower case soon followed. After being brought into the case just three months before trial, Maddox used witnesses to show the plaintiff's poor performance and a series on incidents that undermined her ability to be an effective manager.

He's also had a front row seat to how difficult it can be for local governments to discipline or fire problem police officers. In February, he won an appellate decision barring a district attorney's investigator from challenging his suspension for dishonesty. Bustillos v. County of Shasta, C085885.

As for his next challenges, Maddox said plaintiff's firms are always adapting.

"Retaliation cases have spiked in the last 10 years," he said. "It's become, I think, common knowledge those cases are easier to get to a jury because there are so many factual issues involved. A judge can't throw out a case when there are factual disputes."

-- Malcolm Maclachlan