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
Breach of Contract
Age Discrimination

William Doucette v. CIM Group, L.P. et al.

Published: Sep. 25, 2020 | Result Date: Aug. 13, 2020 | Filing Date: Oct. 3, 2019 |

Case number: 2:19-cv-08539-VAP-JDE Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Judge

Virginia A. Phillips

Court

CD CA


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Leslie S. McAfee
(Law Offices of Leslie S. McAfee)


Defendant

Richard S. Rosenberg
(Ballard, Rosenberg, Golper & Savitt LLP)

David J. Fishman
(Ballard, Rosenberg, Golper & Savitt LLP)

Stephanie B. Kantor
(Ballard, Rosenberg, Golper & Savitt LLP)


Facts

Plaintiff William Doucette, a member of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, filed suit against Defendants CIM Group, L.P., a California Limited Partnership, Chris Latsch, and Theatredreams LA CHI, alleging breach of contract, violation of Civil Code sections 51 and 52.1, and various claims of discrimination and retaliation.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended on or about July 12, 2016, Plaintiff accepted a job with Defendants that required Plaintiff to perform as a stage technician between two and twelve weeks of work, which also included the possibility of follow-on work. Plaintiff contended however Defendants discharged Plaintiff the morning of July 12, 2016.
Specifically, Plaintiff contended he was fired and discriminated against because of his age, and because he previously filed grievances against Defendants.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants moved to have the complaint dismissed on the grounds that Plaintiff had failed to first exhaust his remedies under the Collective Bargaining Agreement before Plaintiff filed suit, and such requirement was mandated under Section 301(a) of the Labor Management Relations Act, that his claims were barred by all of the applicable statutes of limitation, and for failure to identify a cognizable theory.

Result

The court ruled in favor of Defendants and dismissed the case with prejudice.


#135571

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

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