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.

Torts
Invasion of Privacy
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

Rommel Lorenzo v. Hongjin Crown America, Chuck Yoo

Published: Oct. 31, 2009 | Result Date: Jun. 8, 2009 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: BC383033 Verdict –  Mixed verdict

Court

L.A. Superior Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Ann B. Guleser
(Employment Lawyers Group)


Defendant

Stephen E. Ronk
(Gordon & Rees LLP)

Michael E. McCabe
(McClaugherty & Associates)

Stephanie P. Alexander


Facts

In June 2007, defendant Chuck Yoo, a supervisor of defendant Hongjin Crown America (HJCA), made a cell phone videotape of employee plaintiff Rommel Lorenzo sitting on a toilet holding a magazine. Defendant showed the tape to a co-worker. The plaintiff resigned and filed suit, alleging violations of Labor Code Section 435, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. HJCA cross-claimed, alleging conversion and breach of contract.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that Yoo used the video to coerce and threaten plaintiff into performing tasks and buying him lunch. He contended that the video was sent and shown to others.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
HJCA denied that it was responsible for the action of Yoo and contended the action was outside the course of Yoo's employment. HJCA alleged that plaintiff copied its customer list and pricing information and took them when he resigned, which was prohibited by the plaintiff's employment agreement and handbook. Also, plaintiff took two helmets estimated at $1950 from HJCA.

Injuries

The plaintiff claimed emotional distress. Both defendants denied that Lorenzo suffered emotional distress.

Result

A jury found there was an invasion of privacy, but did not award damages. On the cross-complaint, the jury found that Lorenzo breached his employment agreement and converted HJCA property, but did not owe damages for the breach or conversion, according to defense counsel.

Other Information

FILING DATE: Dec. 28, 2007.


#87670

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

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