Kevin Lee v. City and County of San Francisco; San Francisco Police Department, and Does 1 through 10
Published: Oct. 21, 2022 | Result Date: Sep. 13, 2022 | Filing Date: Nov. 22, 2019 |Case number: CGC-19-580969 Settlement – $35,000
Judge
Court
San Francisco County Superior Court
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Menaka N. Fernando
(Outten & Golden LLP)
Defendant
Caroline M. Page
(Office of the San Francisco City Attorney)
Kate G. Kimberlin
(Office of the San Francisco City Attorney)
Facts
Kevin Lee, 43, is a Chinese-American man with twenty years of experience in law enforcement. Lee brought an action against his employers, the City and County of San Francisco and the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD).
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: After witnessing two officers falsifying an accident report, plaintiff reported this conduct to his superior. Plaintiff contended that, rather than commending plaintiff, officers and supervisors subsequently chastised plaintiff for his honesty, calling him an "asshole," and caused plaintiff emotional distress. Plaintiff contended that his complaint was never formally investigated, and the officers involved were never disciplined. Plaintiff also asserted that, despite his exceptional scores on the Lieutenant eligibility exam, he was passed over for promotion multiple times. Instead of promoting plaintiff, defendant SFPD promoted less qualified female and non-Asian American candidates, who were ranked lower on the Lieutenant promotion eligibility list than plaintiff, had not made protected complaints, and some had notable disciplinary issues. Plaintiff alleged violations of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) based on discrimination based on his sex, national origin and race, failure to prevent discrimination and retaliation, and retaliation for his protected complaints. Plaintiff also alleged retaliation for disclosure of unlawful acts in violation of FEHA and the Labor Code.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied all contentions. Among other things, defendants asserted that any and all employment actions taken with respect to plaintiff were not based on any illegal consideration, but rather were based on one or more legitimate, sufficient, non-discriminatory reasons. Defendants also contended that it exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any discrimination or harassment and that plaintiff unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventative or corrective procedures provided by defendants or take steps to avoid harm.
Result
The case settled for $35,000.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390