Ross v. Riverside County

Case Name: Ross v. Riverside County

Type of Case: Whistleblower retaliation, disability discrimination

Court: Riverside County

Judge(s): Judge Kira L. Klatchko

Defense Lawyers: Woodruff, Spradlin & Smart APC, Daniel K. Spradlin, Brian A. Moore, Jason McEwen

Plaintiff Lawyers: James W. Parkinson ALPC, James W. Parkinson; Terry Singleton APC, Terry Singleton, John C. Lemon; Hewgill, Cobb & Lockard APC, Efaon Cobb

Almost a decade ago, Christopher Ross sued Riverside County, alleging he had been pushed out of his job as a senior deputy district attorney because he would not go along with prosecuting an innocent man for murder. The troubling allegations garnered some news coverage when the lawsuit was first filed and a little more last spring when an appellate court published a narrow but meaningful decision on a discovery issue from the case.

Ross's lawsuit finally went to trial in the fall. In November, a jury voted unanimously against him.

His complaint against the county said that in 2011 a supervisor assigned him to take over a murder prosecution from another deputy. That deputy told Ross she believed the accused was innocent, and after looking into the case and having DNA tested, he agreed with her.

Brian A. Moore

His supervisors resisted his recommendations to dismiss the case, including once when an assistant district attorney "responded with anger and hostility" to the idea. The same supervisor also instructed Ross not to turn over exculpatory evidence -- including another person's confession -- to the defendant's attorney, according to the lawsuit. Ross v. Riverside County, PSC1403729 (Riv. Super. Ct., filed July 10, 2014).

Later, the office transferred the case to another prosecutor and, ultimately, dismissed it. The defendant has since been declared factually innocent and has sued the county for malicious prosecution.

Meanwhile, in 2013, Ross began requesting time off work and less stressful assignments while he sought a diagnosis and treatment of a potentially serious neurological condition possibly related to his time serving as a Green Beret in Iraq. Those requests devolved into a series of disputes with his bosses until, in April 2014, he declared himself constructively terminated and, a few months later, sued.

As the litigation played out, it grew to involve, in one way or another, three successive Riverside district attorneys plus two former supervisors in the office, one of them now a superior court judge and the other the Riverside County executive.

The trial began on Sept. 26 and Ross testified at one point that he had given his life to the prosecution office for nine years, but it eventually destroyed his reputation, according to a news account. He now practices in Texas.

Jason McEwen

The defense argued that Ross had not been pushed out of his job for complaining about the murder case. Further, it said he couldn't claim protection as a whistleblower because he couldn't have believed that telling supervisors about exculpatory evidence amounted to reporting violations of state or federal law.

The jury said the same thing on the special verdict form it submitted on Nov. 14. It also found that Ross never had a disability that limited his ability to work.

The attorneys for neither side would discuss the case. But Ross's lead attorney, James Parkinson, did tell a reporter in a text that he disagreed with the verdict. "Mr. Ross is a great American who was an incredible deputy district attorney," he said.

In a brief phone conversation, the county's lead attorney, Daniel Spradlin, said, "We tried a good case. The evidence overwhelmingly supported the verdict."

-- Don DeBenedictis