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
Age Discrimination
Fraud

Clara Newton v. Riverside County Superior Court, Carol Waterhouse-Tejada

Published: Jun. 26, 2010 | Result Date: Apr. 15, 2010 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: RIC432834 Verdict –  Defense

Court

Orange Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Dennis P. Riley
(Mesisca, Riley & Kreitenberg LLP)


Defendant

Fred M. Plevin


Experts

Defendant

A. Jubin Merati Ph.D.
(technical)

Facts

Plaintiff Clara Newton submitted a job application for a staff position as a Spanish language interpreter for the defendant Riverside County Superior Court on June 30, 2004, after having been told her previous work, as an interpreter under an independent contractor basis, was no longer needed. The court rejected her application on July 14.

Newton filed suit against the court and Carol Waterhouse-Tejada, a budget analyst employee, alleging age discrimination and fraud.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Newton claimed that the court chose to hire younger interpreters and rejected her application due to her age. She further contended that, at the time she submitted her application, the court was recruiting new employees and that Waterhouse-Tejada persuaded Newton to remain an independent contractor and withdraw her application using false information.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The court contended that it rejected Newton's application because new employment was not being recruited, which was normal practice. Waterhouse-Tejada alleged that she gave Newton accurate information without any scheme involved and that Newton made her own decision to withdraw.

Damages

Newton sought damages between $550,000 and $750,000 for past and future lost earnings, as well as emotional distress.

Result

The jury rendered a verdict in favor of the defense.

Deliberation

2.5 hours

Length

nine days


#117425

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

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