Facts

Joseph Vela sued the City of Los Angeles and Charles Beck, in connection with his employment at the Los Angeles Police Department.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Vela alleged that he worked for the LAPD as a sworn police officer from Jan. 5, 2009 until about July 12 or July 21, 2010. He claimed that he began working for the LAPD when he entered the Los Angeles Police Academy on Jan. 5, 2009. He graduated from the Academy on July 18, 2009. The next day, he was transferred from Training Division to Pacific Division. On or about Jan. 8, 2010, he was placed on administrative leave while the department conducted an investigation into allegations made against him. However, he remained on the payroll and was required to call-in to the department twice a day. On or about July 12 and 14, he was personally served with a Notice of Termination or Suspension of Sworn Probationary Employee, which stated that his probation was terminated effective July 12, 2010.

Vela contended that he became a permanent employee when he was served with the Notice of Termination form probation on July 12 and 14, 2010.

Vela requested for a Board of Rights hearing, but was denied. Defendants offered him a liberty interest hearing, which was only available to probationary officers to afford them a chance to clear their names. At the liberty interest hearing held on March 29. 2013, the hearing officer determined that he lacked jurisdiction to rule upon Vela's assertion that he was entitled to a Board of Rights hearing as a permanent employee. As such, Vela petitioned for writ of mandate, arguing that he was entitled to a full and fair evidentiary hearing before a Board of Rights.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants denied Vela's allegations, and asserted various affirmative defenses.

Damages

Vela requested an unspecified amount of compensatory damages, plus $25,000 for each alleged malicious violation committed by defendants as a result of the denial of his statutory rights under Government Code Section 3304(b) and other benefits of his employment.

Result

The parties agreed to a $265,176 settlement.