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
Sexual Harassment, Pregnancy Discrimination and Retaliation

Jenny Zhao v. The County of Los Angeles

Published: Apr. 26, 2008 | Result Date: Nov. 21, 2007 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: BC345536 Verdict –  Mixed; Two defense verdicts; one verdict of $54,000.

Court

L.A. Superior Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Helena Marie S. Wise
(Law Office of Helena Marie S. Wise)


Defendant

Nohemi Gutierrez Ferguson
(Gutierrez, Preciado & House LLP)

Sarosh Qaiser


Experts

Plaintiff

Waleed Shindy
(medical)

Frederick O. Lee
(medical)

Richard North
(medical)

Angela W. Liao
(medical)

Defendant

James High
(medical)

Facts

Jenny Zhao, Shillane Chen, and Phoenix Wu El Khoury, plaintiffs, worked with the county of Los Angeles, defendant. According to Zhao, her co-worker, Shaoli Xu, called her a middle-aged woman, and said that a male engineer was more valuable because Chinese men and women were different. When Zhao told Steve Hennessee, defendant, about her concerns, he minimized her concerns.

Chen stated that after being considered a witness in Zhao's case, Hennessee made her working conditions difficult and yelled at her when she refused to make changes to a budget which he had given to her, and which was subject to strict deadlines.

According to Khoury, her promotability score was reduced after she became pregnant, and after she participated in the Zhao investigation.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Zhao claimed that Xu interfered with her work product, and she claimed sexual harassment against the county of Los Angeles and Xu. Chen alleged retaliation against Hennessee and the county of Los Angeles. Khoury claimed pregnancy discrimination and unlawful retaliation against defendants.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
The defendants argued that Zhao complained about Xu's alleged comments, because Xu was promoted, instead of Zhao. With respect to Zhao, defendants further argued that the conduct alleged did not constitute sexual harassment as it was not severe or pervasive. With respect to plaintiff Khoury, defendants argued that she was not subjected to pregnancy discrimination or retaliation and that her decline in performance was the reason for her decline in scores. With respect to Chen, defendants argued that the conduct did not constitute harassment or retaliation as it was not severe or pervasive.

Result

A verdict of $54,000 was reached in favor of Chen. Chen received $6,000 for past economic loss, $10,000 for future economic loss, $18,000 for past non-economic loss, and $20,000 for future non-economic loss against the county of Los Angeles and Hennessee. A jury found in favor of defendants on Zhao's claim of sexual harassment and Khoury's claims of pregnancy discrimination and retaliation.


#125311

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

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