Burney Armstrong v. City of Pasadena, John Pratt
Published: Sep. 17, 2005 | Result Date: May 18, 2005 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: BC294793 Verdict – $61,210
Judge
Court
L.A. Superior Central
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Morris S. Getzels
(Morris Getzels Law Office)
Defendant
Facts
Plaintiff Burney Armstrong worked as a network engineer for defendant, the City of Pasadena, in its Information and Technology Systems Division (ITSD). His immediate supervisor was Paul Gold, who later died prior to the plaintiff filing his complaint. Defendant John Pratt, the Director of the ITSD Division, became the plaintiff's immediate supervisor after Gold died. The plaintiff worked at the division for 15 months and during that time, he alleged that he was discriminated against and harassed because he is African American. He complained to the City's Affirmative Action Department about the ongoing racial discrimination and harassment. His employment was later terminated.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that because of his race, the City discriminated against and harassed him. He alleged that the City would not allow him to get a key to the office, denied him access to computer servers and network systems, did not give him business cards or a City employee badge, excluded him from meetings, and would not allow him to work overtime. The plaintiff contended that the City fired him in retaliation for his complaining to the City's Affirmative Action Department. At trial, the plaintiff claimed $1.2 million for loss of earnings, humiliation, and emotional distress (the defendant claimed the plaintiff asked for $1.6 million). DEFENDANT
The plaintiff contended that because of his race, the City discriminated against and harassed him. He alleged that the City would not allow him to get a key to the office, denied him access to computer servers and network systems, did not give him business cards or a City employee badge, excluded him from meetings, and would not allow him to work overtime. The plaintiff contended that the City fired him in retaliation for his complaining to the City's Affirmative Action Department. At trial, the plaintiff claimed $1.2 million for loss of earnings, humiliation, and emotional distress (the defendant claimed the plaintiff asked for $1.6 million). DEFENDANT CONTENTIONS:
The defendant denied the plaintiff's allegations. It alleged that the plaintiff was a temporary agency employee whose assignment was terminated when his services were no longer needed. The City contended that it was his immediate supervisor Paul Gold, also a temporary agency employee, who recommended terminating the plaintiff's assignment and whose decision it was not to grant certain privileges. Gold died prior to trial and was not present to explain his reasons for denying the plaintiff certain privileges. The defendant argued that denying the plaintiff certain privileges did not impact his ability to perform his temporary assignment. After Armstrong filed a complaint with the Affirmative Action Department, the City conducted an investigation. The defendant contended that the investigation did not support the plaintiff's claim of discrimination. In response to the plaintiff's retaliation claim, the City contended that the plaintiff was one of more than 25 temporary agency employees whose assignments were terminated and whose positions were either eliminated or filled by full time City employees.
Settlement Discussions
There were two settlement conferences. The defendant discussed offering $50,000 for all three original plaintiffs.
Damages
The plaintiff claimed $1.2 million for loss of earnings, humiliation, and emotional distress. The plaintiff asked for $1.6 million at trial.
Result
The jury returned a special verdict, specifically finding racial discrimination, racial harassment, and retaliation based on race, and awarded him $62,210.
Other Information
Armstrong was one of three plaintiffs who filed suit against the City regarding the termination of their temporary assignments. Armstrong alleged race discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation. The other two, Denise Bowen and Emily Henry, additionally charged gender discrimination. Bowen's case was dismissed on a summary judgment motion, which is on appeal. Henry chose not to proceed on the eve of trial. Armstrong's motion for attorney's fees was settled.
Deliberation
six days
Length
12 days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390