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
FEHA
Wrongful Termination

Helton De Carvalho v. McCormick & Schmick's Seafood Restaurants Inc., McCormick & Schmick Restaurant Corporation, Spenger's Fresh Fish Grotto, James M. Cope, Melissa Katz

Published: Oct. 3, 2009 | Result Date: Jul. 30, 2009 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: RG 05-231621 Verdict –  Defense

Court

Alameda Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Steven Robinson

Angela M. Alioto
(Law Offices of Joseph L. Alioto and Angela Alioto)


Defendant

Janine S. Simerly
(Miller Law Group)


Experts

Plaintiff

Nora Ostrofe
(technical)

Amy Oppenheimer
(technical)

Facts

On Jan. 26, 2005, plaintiff Helton De Carvalho was terminated from his position as an assistant manager at Spenger's Fresh Fish Grotto (Spenger's) in Berkeley, where he had worked for nine months. De Carvalho sued Spenger's; McCormick & Schmick Restaurant Corporation, which owns and operates Spenger's; and two of Spenger's managers, Melissa Katz and Michael Cope, alleging violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff alleged racial discrimination and harassment based on his race (African Brazilian). He claimed that he was terminated because of his race and in retaliation for complaining about discrimination against other employees and purported segregation of African American patrons. He also claimed intentional infliction of emotional distress

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendants denied the allegations and contended that De Carvalho was terminated because of misconduct. As for the retaliation claim, the defendants contended that De Carvalho made no complaints of discrimination prior to his termination.

The defense argued that California's after-acquired evidence rule cut off plaintiff's alleged damages as of Jan. 31, 2005, the date that a former employee informed the defendants that De Carvalho had exposed himself to her at work. Had De Carvalho still been employed at Spenger's, they claimed, he would have terminated on that day.

Damages

Plaintiff claimed economic damages of $120,000 to $1.2 million, as well as unspecified damages for emotional distress. He also sought punitive damages.

Result

The jury returned a complete defense verdict as to all defendants on all causes of action.

Deliberation

12 hours

Poll

12-0

Length

six weeks


#87725

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

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