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
Retaliation
Free Speech Rights

Daryelle Lawanna Preston v. City of Oakland, and Deanna Santana

Published: Nov. 14, 2015 | Result Date: Sep. 23, 2015 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 3:14-cv-02022-NC Verdict –  $613,302

Court

USDC Northern


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Sonya Z. Mehta
(Siegel, Yee, Brunner & Mehta)

Daniel Mark Siegel
(Siegel, Yee, Brunner & Mehta)


Defendant

Jennifer N. Logue

Ross A. Boughton
(Ford Harrison LLP)

Maria S. Bee
(Office of the Oakland City Attorney)

David A. Lucero

Susan T. Kumagai
(Lafayette & Kumagai LLP)

James F. Hodgkins

Janice L. Sperow

Forrest F. Fang

Otis McGee Jr.

Jesper I. Rasmussen

Arlene M. Rosen

Gary T. Lafayette
(Lafayette & Kumagai LLP)

Celia M. Ruiz

Jody Struck
(Haapala, Thompson & Abern, LLP)

Barbara J. Parker
(Office of the Oakland City Attorney)

Camille H. Pating
(Meyers Nave APC)

Geoffrey Spellberg
(Renne Public Law Group)

Africa E. Davidson


Facts

Daryelle Lawanna Preston was the Employee Relations Director for the City of Oakland. She sued the City of Oakland, and the City Administrator for the City of Oakland, Deanna Santana, relating to an employment dispute.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Preston contended that she reported several instances of illegal conduct to her superior Santana who then carried out a series of adverse actions that resulted in Preston's eventual termination. Specifically, Preston contended that Santana ordered her to sign off on an official report that would racially target Oakland City Council member Desley Brooks. Preston further contended that Santana assisted the Fire Chief's unlawful contract negotiations and retaliated against Preston when she reported the Fire Chief's acts. Last, Preston contended that Santana and the Treasury Manager and Personnel Director of the City of Oakland violated state law regarding the collection of union dues.

Plaintiff claimed she was terminated for allegedly refusing to follow orders to violate the law and for reporting several violations of federal and state law to her supervisor. She brought claims for violation of Cal. Labor Code Section 1102.5 and for violation of her constitutional right to free speech pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1983.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants contended that plaintiff was an "at will" department head, and the City Administrator could terminate her for any reason or no reason at all and without notice.

Result

The jury returned a verdict in favor of Preston and against the City of Oakland in the amount of $613,302 on the Labor Code claim. The court granted Santana's motion for judgment as a matter of law on Preston's First Amendment claim.

Other Information

FILING DATE: May 2, 2014.


#110688

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

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