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
Race Discrimination
Retaliation

Darrel Williams v. Helix Water District

Published: Jul. 25, 2015 | Result Date: Apr. 24, 2015 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 37-2013-00073219 Summary Judgment –  Defense

Court

San Diego Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Dennis N. Brady
(San Diego Employment Law Group)

Garrett A. Smee
(Daley & Heft LLP)


Defendant

Neal S. Meyers
(Meyers Fozi, LLP)

Hayley D. Schwartzkopf


Facts

Plaintiff Darrel Williams sued his employer defendant Helix Water District, claiming discrimination.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff, who is African-American, works as a Senior Engineering Technician. He claimed that since the early 2000's he had not received certain promotions, which he believed he deserved and that he had been subjected to differential disciplinary treatment. In November 2011, plaintiff complained of what he described as a racial remark he had heard one employee direct towards another employee. In March 2012, plaintiff received a performance related reprimand.

Plaintiff asserted claims of race and color discrimination under the Fair Employment and Housing Act as well as FEHA based retaliation for reporting the racial remark he overheard. He claimed damages based upon the differential in income he believed he deserved if he had been promoted as well as general damages.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant claimed that plaintiff is a long-term District employee who over the years had received raises, promotions and generally good performance evaluations, with certain exceptions. The promotion plaintiff contended he was denied occurred in 2008. Defendant contended that plaintiff did not complain at the time. In 2012, he had fallen behind in completing the design of one or more projects. As a result, plaintiff received a written reprimand that did not alter the terms or conditions of his employment. Defendant claimed that plaintiff's allegations of race/color discrimination did not raise a triable issue of material fact. Further, the racial remark he heard between two other employees, defendant claimed, was appropriately investigated and plaintiff could not establish he suffered from any adverse employment action as a result of him complaining about the event.

Settlement Discussions

Plaintiff declined dispute resolution or a settlement offer.

Result

Summary Judgment granted in favor of defendant.

Other Information

Plaintiff is contemplating an appeal. FILING DATE: Oct. 13, 2013.


#115646

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

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