Facts

The plaintiff was an eligibility worker for the County Department of Public Social Services. After the county discharged him in January 2002 for inappropriate conduct, the Civil Service Commission ordered him reinstated.

When the plaintiff did not respond to the department's requests that he return to work following his reinstatement, the department deemed him to have abandoned his position in October 2003 and refused to reinstate him when he appeared for work in June 2004, eight months after notice that he had abandoned his job.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that the refusal to reinstate him in June 2004 was retaliation for his participation in a sexual harassment investigation during the period December 1997 to November 2000. He also claimed that he no longer lived at the address to which the department directed the notices directing him to return to work following the Civil Service Commission Decision.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant contended that there was no causal connection between the plaintiff's participation in the sexual harassment investigation and the refusal to reinstate him in June 2004. The defendant also contended that the plaintiff had abandoned his position by failing to respond to the notices to return to work, and, therefore, there was no adverse employment action by the department.

Specials in Evidence

$33,000 per year

Result

Verdict for the defendant on three causes of action: retaliation in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act; retaliation for exercise of free speech rights; and wrongful discharge in violation of public policy. Nonsuit for the defendant on remaining cause of action for violation of plaintiff's due process rights.

Deliberation

7.5 hours

Poll

10-2 (that the plaintiff was lawfully deemed to have resigned from County employment)

Length

seven days