Facts

Plaintiff Ada Cordero-Sacks worked for defendant Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles ("HACLA") as its code and enforcement attorney for 11 months. Her job involved investigating Section 8 landlords and tenants for federal program violations. She sued for whistleblower retaliation violations of California Labor Code section 1102.5 and Government Code section 12653, respectively, and for wrongful termination in violation of public policy. Her claim under the Government Code went to a verdict after her other claims were dismissed on summary judgment or non-suit.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff alleged that she was fired for investigating a matter to be filed under the False Claims Act. She alleged that she was fired in violation of California Government Code section 12653(b).

DEFENDANT CONTENTIONS:
The defendant alleged that plaintiff could not bring her suit against her client, the Housing Authority, because of the attorney-client privilege and the duty of confidentiality that she violated in doing so and in prosecuting the case. Her attorney status limited defendant's cross-examination of her because it would have been forced to waive its privilege. Defendant also alleged that plaintiff violated other persons' privacy rights by her unlawful computer access of background information without authorization. Plaintiff's work was substandard and she failed to coordinate her work with the Los Angeles City Attorney's Office, as her job description required, during her probationary employment period of one year. She was terminated in October 2007 and in the next month began providing privileged and confidential information to assist in litigation against her former client. She ended her case alleging that she was fired in retaliation for conducting approximately six background searches of persons using Choicepoint software in August 2007.

Settlement Discussions

While the summary judgment motion was pending, HACLA requested a demand from plaintiff. She responded with a demand of $675,000. Because of plaintiff's breach of her obligations as an attorney for the Housing Authority, the Housing Authority refused to offer her anything to settle the case.

Damages

Plaintiff asked the jury to award $1.5 million, including $700,000 in emotional distress damages.

Injuries

Plaintiff claimed a psychiatric adjustment disorder, while defendant's psychiatrist testified she had no emotional or psychiatric injury at all.

Result

Jury verdict by a poll of 9-3 for plaintiff on her claim for whistleblower retaliation, California Government Code section 12653(b). The jury awarded $98,889 in past economic loss, $330,000 in future economic loss, and $10,000 in emotional distress.

Other Information

Plaintiff intends to seek double back pay, or an additional $98,889, and attorney's fees. Defendant intends to move for a new trial and judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and to appeal. FILING DATE: Feb. 25, 2008.

Deliberation

4.5 hours

Length

three weeks