This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Employment Law
FEHA
Retaliation

Thomas Mangano v. Verity Inc., Autonomy NA Holdings Inc., Autonomy Corp. plc, Autonomy Europe Holdings, Ltd.

Published: Dec. 13, 2008 | Result Date: May 23, 2008 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 1-07-CV-079221 Verdict –  Defense

Court

Santa Clara Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Stephen R. Jaffe
(Jaffe Law Firm)

Traci M. Hinden


Defendant

Gregory L. Doll
(Doll & Amir LLP)

Hunter R. Eley
(Doll, Amir & Eley LLP)


Experts

Plaintiff

Rayna Brown
(technical)

Phillip H. Allman III, Ph.D.
(technical)

Defendant

Ali I. Saad
(technical)

Facts

Plaintiff Thomas Mangano brought a lawsuit against Verity Inc., his former employer, for retaliation under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act seeking damages in excess of $3 million. The retaliation lawsuit was based on a 2005 discrimination lawsuit Magano had filed against Verity Inc. and his former supervisor.

In December 2006, the plaintiff was terminated as part of a reorganization within the company. The plaintiff filed this retaliation lawsuit, alleging that his former 2005 discrimination lawsuit was the motivating factor in the decision to terminate his employment.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that defendants retaliated against the plaintiff for filing and prosecuting his previous discrimination lawsuit.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
The defendants contended that the elimination of plaintiff's position was part of a justified reduction in force, and that plaintiff's role at the company was no longer necessary under Autonomy's business model.

Result

Defense verdict on all counts.

Other Information

The plaintiff moved for a new trial, which was denied on July 24, 2008. On Oct. 1, 2008, defendants were awarded costs in the amount of $77,329.25. On Aug. 26, 2008, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal, which is pending in the Sixth District Court of Appeal.

Deliberation

three hours

Length

10 days


#107893

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390