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
Retaliation
Wrongful Termination

Osmar Zelaya v. RMI International Inc. and Does 1 through10

Published: Aug. 31, 2013 | Result Date: Jun. 14, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: BC480430 Verdict –  Defense

Court

L.A. Superior Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Ralph T. Rogari


Defendant

Stephen E. Ronk
(Gordon & Rees LLP)

Michelle L. Steinhardt


Facts

Plaintiff Osmar Zelaya was hired by RMI International Inc., a security services provider, to be a lead field supervisor. Plaintiff's job was to supervise certain security personnel in the field. Plaintiff filed suit against RMI, his former employer, claiming to be a whistleblower who was fired because he reported to his supervisors and a client what he believed to be illegal billing.

Zelaya sued RMI, alleging that his termination constituted race discrimination, retaliation, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Zelaya claimed he verbally complained to RMI about what he believed to be an illegal billing. RMI denied his accusation and later terminated his employment. Zelaya argued that he was labeled as a whistleblower and that his termination was improper retaliation. He also alleged he was passed over for a promotion and was terminated because of his race and because he was from El Salvador.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant argued that plaintiff had no knowledge of the billing process while working for RMI and therefore his claims were not credible. Defendant also argued that despite plaintiff's claims, the plaintiff did not make any complaints of illegal billing until after he was terminated for poor performance and a conflict of interest. Therefore, the defendant could not have retaliated against the plaintiff for a complaint that he had not yet made.

Damages

Plaintiff sought more than $350,000 for his past and future lost earnings and emotional distress.

Result

The jury returned a defense verdict.

Deliberation

30 minutes

Poll

11-1

Length

four days


#93823

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

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