Louis Giugliano v. BKM Enterprises, Inc. et al.
Published: Oct. 1, 2002 | Result Date: Jul. 18, 2002 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: BC246080 Verdict – $1,522,000
Judge
Court
L.A. Superior Central
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Vida M. Holguin
(Law Office of Vida M. Holguin)
Defendant
Frank J. Revere
(Revere & Wallace)
Richard B. Specter
(Corbett, Steelman & Specter)
Experts
Plaintiff
Barbara Luna
(technical)
Facts
The plaintiff employee was terminated by the defendants, office furniture distributors, after five years of
employment. The plaintiff claimed the Connecticut-based parent company began to interfere with the
California dealershipÆs operations, including showing hostility toward the plaintiff. Ultimately, the plaintiff
was terminated.
The plaintiff claimed he subsequently discovered that the executives of the parent company had been making
damaging statements about him, including to a prospective employer. According to the plaintiff, the CEO of
the California dealership had promised, that the plaintiff would receive an interest in the company when he
purchased the company from the Connecticut parent.
The Connecticut parent fired both of them without selling the CEO the company, relying on the
terms of a written agreement with the California CEO.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff made a CCP Section 998 Offer of Compromise in the amount of $850,000. The defendants offered $35,000 shortly before trial
Result
The plaintiff prevailed on his claims for retaliation under FEHA, wrongful termination in violation of public policy, breach of implied contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, slander and violation of Labor Code Section 1050. The plaintiff also was awarded punitive damages on the slander, wrongful termination and retaliation claims. The defendants prevailed on the ownership fraud and age and ancestry discrimination claims. The trial court nonsuited the plaintiff on the interference with prospective economic advantage claim. The verdict consisted of $132,000 lost wages; $350,000 slander; $500,000 emotional distress pursuant to retaliation under FEHA; $100,000 for violation of Labor Code Section 1050 (blackballing), which was automatically trebled by the trial judge to $300,000; $120,000 punitive damages against the owner; and $120,000 punitive damages against the Connecticut company. A Motion for New Trial is set for Oct. 8, 2002.
Other Information
The plaintiff prevailed on his claims for retaliation under FEHA, wrongful termination in violation of public policy, breach of implied contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, slander and violation of Labor Code Section 1050. The plaintiff was also awarded punitive damages on the slander, wrongful termination and retaliation claims. The defendants prevailed on the fraud and discrimination claims. The trial court non-suited the plaintiff on the interference with prospective economic advantage claim. The verdict of $1,522,000 consisted of $132,000 lost wages; $350,000 slander; $500,000 emotional distress pursuant to retaliation under FEHA, $100,000 for violation of Labor Code Section 1050 (blackballing) which was automatically trebled by the trial judge to $300,000; $120,000 punitive damages against the owner and $120,000 punitive damages against the Connecticut company.
Deliberation
one week
Length
seven weeks
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390