Notice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk, The purpose of the law of summary judgment is to provide courts with a mechanism to cut through the parties' pleadings in order to determine whether, despite their allegations, trial is in fact necessary to resolve their dispute.. Although Plaintiff asserts that she reasonably relied on inaccurate information from Mr. Sahota and DFEH, Plaintiff has submitted no evidence that Mr. Sahota or DFEH made any inaccurate representations about the timeliness of her Complaint. Additionally, Defendants contend that the tenth cause of action is insufficiently pled because Exhibit 1 to the FAC constitutes a Collective Bargaining Agreement with another entity and, as such, also does not support Plaintiffs breach of contract claim against UTLA. Thank you and feel free to call me if you have questions. mexico city time zone island of tinian delady fnaf playable animatronics apk android. Plaintiff cites to, It is undisputed that Plaintiff signed a complaint of discrimination prepared by the DFEH on April 19, 2019. (Civ. (Opposition, 7-8.). In a sworn declaration, the plaintiff explained why conditions became so intolerable for her. I), 59:18-22, 64:13-65:1.) ), Plaintiff testified to the following instances of harassing conduct from Joseph: (1) Josephs statement that he wished she were the same age because there were things he wanted to do to you, (2) Josephs statement that he wanted to go down on Plaintiff, (3) Joseph making sexually suggestive gestures, (4) Josephs statement to Plaintiff that she Come sit on Big Papas lap. (DSS 38-42. (b)(1); see also Cal. In addition, the FAC alleges that Defendants, by and through their employees agents or representatives, particularly defendants JOSEPH and MCNAMARA, engaged in a continuous course of conduct in or around Fall 2015 which allegedly constituted a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing contained in Plaintiffs employment contract. Finally, Plaintiff asserts that whether she is liable for any lapsed claims is a question of fact, because Plaintiff has submitted evidence demonstrating that she did not sign draft complaints from Mr. Sahota because they were inaccurate. icx 7250 console cable; dara trager snake farm; fort bend hightower football; carolina herrera advert male model; ian deason jetblue salary; who is the voice (UTLA) Plaintiff also brings this action against Defendant, Brian McNamara (McNamara), who was allegedly the Field and Organizing Director for ULTA as well as Defendant, Carl Joseph. He gets other training as well. Civil Code, section 52.1 (the Bane Act) allows an individual to sue for damages if a person or persons interferes by threat, intimidation, or coercion, or attempts to interfere by threat, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state. ; (Civ.

Defendants demurrer is sustained as to the fourth, seventh and tenth causes of action. 1 TO PRECLUDE REFERENCE TO CARLA BARBOZA'S TESTIMONY OR DOCUMENTS, Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. Plaintiff also points to Karen Rices testimony in support of her argument that Mr. Sahota should have disclosed applicable DFEH deadlines to her. Webbrian mcnamara, utlajesi lilas macaninch. Brian has 2 jobs listed on their profile. (Code Civ. Further, Plaintiff, Finally, Plaintiff attests that at no time did anyone at the DFEH tell her that she, Q: And folks like Mr. Sahota are trained that those statutory deadlines are necessary to be met in order to effectively comply with the various DFEH requirements to ultimately bring a a, Viewing the evidence submitted in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, the court finds that no triable issues exist with regard to the fourth cause of action. R.R. Suleimanyan currently is employed as a legislative coordinator with a unit of SEIU Local 121RN, which represents nurses, according to Erskines court papers. The burdens and order of proof therefore shift under the McDonnell Douglas test when an employer defendant seeks summary judgment. Code, ; 12960, subd. She did have evidence that he yelled at her and scolded her behavior in a way she felt inappropriate, but there was no violence or threats of violence proved. (PSS 14; Declaration of Aaron Osten (Osten Decl.), Exh. 2022-10-11. ), Defendants assert that Plaintiffs Bane Act claims against them fail for the same reasons as to Plaintiffs Ralph Act, discussed below. [D]emurrers for uncertainty are disfavoredand are granted only if the pleading is so incomprehensible that a defendant cannot reasonably respond. (Mahan v. Charles W. Chan Ins. The demurrer is otherwise overruled. And the best part of all, documents in their CrowdSourced Library are FREE! Posted on 25 fevereiro, 2023 by . Exhibit 1 to the FAC provides in pertinent part as follows: We are pleased to confirm the offer of employment for the position of Political Organizer with United Teachers Los Angeles. In addition, even where a complaint is in some respects uncertain, courts strictly construe a demurrer for uncertainty because ambiguities can be clarified under modern discovery procedures. (Khoury v. Malys of California, Inc. (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 612, 616. (DSS 50-63.) 3 TO EXCLUDE DR. ALAN A MODARRESSIS NOVEMBER 18, 2021 REPORT, Opposition - OPPOSITION DEFENDANT UTLAS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION IN LIMINE NO. Whoops! (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 265, 294. (Erskine Decl.

Secret Lives of Second Wives. 3 TO EXCLUDE DR. ALAN A MODARRESSI'S NOVEMBER 18, 2021 REPORT, 5/9/2022: Opposition - OPPOSITION PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. Civil Code ;;52.1, 52), (7) violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Cal. Brian Jude Mcnamaras response: Sylvia, thank you very much for the excellent review. 1 (Rice Depo), 61:1-62:9. Defendants request judicial notice of the following in support of their motion: Legislative Counsels Digest regarding Government Code section 12960 (Assembly Bill 9 [A.B. Ct.(1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 594, 601.) Defendants request is granted.

(Erskine Decl. (Joseph) Plaintiff alleges that she was hired as a Political Organizer for UTLA on or about September 29, 2015 pursuant to a written employment agreement and that throughout her employment, she was subject to sexually harassing comments and conduct from McNamara and Joseph. Go back to your seat. And so I was scared. (Plaintiff Declaration 16.) The Court of Appeal held that Plaintiff filing an untimely administrative complaint with DFEH is not a bar to his action at law because he diligently pursued his administrative remedy and reasonably relied on the conduct of administrative officials in believing that the limitations period was not a concern. (Id.) brian mcnamara, utla. ), The motion shall be supported by affidavits, declarations, admissions, answers to interrogatories, depositions, and matters of which judicial notice shall or may be taken. Obituary, funeral and service information for Brian M. McNamara from Alexandria, Virginia. Created reference books for the creative department with all marketing materials from 2011-2012, 2012-2013, and 2013-2014. (Opposition, 5-6.) The exhaustion of an administrative remedy is a procedural prerequisite to an action at law, and the failure to exhaust it does not divest a trial court of subject matter jurisdiction. [emphasis original] (Holand v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. (2007) 154 Cal.App.4th 940, 945.). ), Fourth Cause of Action: Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, In every contract there is an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. How to Cut Expanded Metal. ; ;The essence of a Bane Act claim is that the defendant, by the specified improper means (i.e., ;threat[], intimidation or coercion), tried to or did prevent the plaintiff from doing something he or she had the right to do under the law or to force the plaintiff to do something that he or she was not required to do under the law. ; (, the speech itself threatens violence against a specific person or group of persons; and the person or group of persons against whom the threat is directed reasonably fears that, because of the speech, violence will be committed against them or their property and that the person threatening violence had the apparent ability to carry out the threat. (Cal. Civil Code ;;51.7, 52), (10) breach of employment contract against UTLA only. After Plaintiff filed her pre-Complaint inquiry, it is undisputed that she and DFEH investigator Charanjit Sahota engaged in multiple discussions over several months about her claims. (Attorney) null, Notice of Posting of Jury Fees; Filed by: ASTINE SULEIMANYAN (Plaintiff), Case assigned to Hon. Joseph told Suleimanyan that he wished he was the same age as her because there were things he wanted to do to her, the suit alleges. I), 14:14-25.) Please reload the page and try again. (DSS 9.) Cancellation and Refund Policy, Privacy Policy, and (, Demurrers do not lie as to only parts of causes of action where some valid claim is alleged but must dispose of an entire cause of action to be sustained. (, In every contract there is an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

(see SAC, 73-83. ), According to Plaintiff, these emails are all direct evidence that DFEH mishandled Plaintiffs complaint from the outset. ), Awrittencontract must be pled verbatim in the body of the complaint, be attached to the complaint and incorporated by reference, or be pled according to its legal effect. Select the best result to find their address, phone number, relatives, and public records. The motion is otherwise denied. (k). I filed this complaint with DFEH in November of 2017. Complaint; Filed by: ASTINE SULEIMANYAN (Plaintiff); As to: UTLA dba UNITED TEACHERS LOS ANGELES, a California Organization (Defendant); BRIAN MCNAMARA (Defendant); CARL JOSEPH (Defendant) et al. The demurrer is otherwise overruled. McNamara and Joseph (Individual Defendants) now demur to the fourth cause of action. The court agrees with Individual Defendants that the fourth cause of action does not plead a cause of action against them. An employer defendant may meet its initial burden on summary judgment and require the employee plaintiff to present evidence establishing a triable issue of material fact, by presenting evidence that either negates an element of the employee's prima facie case, or establishes a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for taking the adverse employment action against the employee. (Id. Ninth Cause of Action: Violation of the Ralph Act, Civil Code section 51.7 (the Ralph Act) provides that all persons have the right to be free of violence, or intimidation by threat of violence, committed against their persons, committed because of their political affiliation or any characteristic defined in Civil Code section 51. The court also denied Plaintiffs motion for reconsideration of this ruling. There is a ten-month probationary period for all professional staff members who will be members of the United Staff Workers (USW) bargaining unit, your representative will meet with you and provide a copy of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. ASTINE SULEIMANYAN VS UTLA DBA UNITED TEACHERS LOS ANGELES, A CALIFORNIA ORGANIZATION, ET AL. McNamaras orders not to leave a meeting did not involve any physical violence or threats of violence, only forceful commands. Government Code section 12960 as it existed prior to the amendments made by A.B. (Id. Brian Michael McNamara, 18, of Alexandria, Virginia, passed away The court treat[s] the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law. at 34:4-13.) . (Motion, 16-19.) A person aggrieved under the Ralph Act may bring a civil action to recover damages, a civil penalty of $25,000, exemplary damages, and an award of attorney fees. (, The court agrees with Plaintiff. Q: And because its important, then is it your expectation that Mr. Sahota would communicate to the employee, for example, thats filing a complaint with the DFEH about these statutory deadlines? Plaintiffs Seventh Cause of Action for Violation of the Ralph Act, Civ. (Opposition, 5-6.) at 41:3-11.) ), Second, with respect to Josephs statement about wanting to go down on Plaintiff, Plaintiff testified that he made the statement once, and gestured it another time. (Id. at 1486.) In addition, Plaintiff contends that Defendants reliance on Cole is misplaced, as Cole does not involve a claim that Plaintiff was misled by representations from DFEH. ), Here, the FAC alleges that throughout her employment with Defendants, Plaintiff was allegedly subject to severe, pervasive, sexual, derogatory, offensive, physically/verbally abusive, and outrageous conduct by defendants MCNAMARA and JOSEPH. (FAC 14.) (DSS 24-26; Depo Exhibit 210 at DFEH 00010-13. ), First, with respect to Josephs statement about Plaintiffs age, Plaintiff testified that Joseph made the comment at least three or four times. (Exhibit B (Plaintiff Deposition, Vol. The filing of the motion shall not extend the time within which a party must otherwise file a responsive pleading. ), Defendants contend that the sixth cause of action is insufficiently pled because the FAC does not allege that Defendants engaged in any actions which threatened Plaintiff and is instead only conclusory as to Defendants alleged threats, intimidation or coercion. Proc., ; 437c, subd. This action arises out of Plaintiff, Astine Suleimanyans (Plaintiff) employment with Defendant, UTLA dba United Teachers of Los Angeles. ; Faculty Physicians and Surgeons of LLUSM v. The Superior Court; Pedro Baron et al. (DSS 7.) ), Pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 2, section 10009(d), The filing date of a complaint shall be the date a DFEH office receives a verified complaint, regardless of whether the complaint is verified by the complainant in the office or the complaint is verified elsewhere and transmitted to the office via United States (U.S.) mail, electronically, private carrier mail (e.g., FedEx), facsimile, or hand delivery. The failure to comply with this requirement of a separate statement may in the courts discretion constitute a sufficient ground for denial of the motion. (Code Civ. McNamara allegedly told the plaintiff she was hired because she was pretty and followed her during a work conference, including to the restroom. (a), (b).) Code ; 51 ;subd. Less. 7-8.) Suleimanyan was hired in September 2015, and her job duties consisted of managing and running various campaigns, overseeing and coordinating phone bank operations and preparing and facilitating political workshops, the suit filed in March 2020 states. A: We have we have training thats provided. A person aggrieved under the Ralph Act may bring a civil action to recover damages, a civil penalty of $25,000, exemplary damages, and an award of attorney fees. (D.C. v. Harvard-Westlake School(2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 836, 856; Civil Code ; 52,subds. (Ramirez, supra, 188 Cal.App.4th at 1482.) The Individual Defendants contend that the fourth cause of action is insufficiently pled as them because the FAC does not allege that Plaintiff was in a contract with either of the Individual Defendants and also fails to allege the harm that Plaintiff allegedly suffered as a result of Individual Defendants conduct. (d).) ), Campbell v. Feld Entertainment, Inc. (N.D. Cal. Co., (2007) 154 Cal. On June 23, 2020, Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint (FAC). Email: cruise planner celebrity Hours: 10am - 6pm EST Joseph made these comments in 2016. (Id., 15:11-13.) (Civ. Joshua Henry @joshuahenry20. Webbrian mcnamara, utla. Thus, the FAC fails to allege a cause of action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing as to Individual Defendants. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure, section 437c, subdivision (a): A party may move for summary judgment in any action or proceeding if it is contended that the action has no merit or that there is no defense to the action or proceeding. Plaintiffs Fifth Cause of Action for Violation of the Bane Act, Civ. (FAC 65.). 2, DFEH00089.) Defendants are to give notice. Once the defendant or cross-defendant has met that burden, the burden shifts to the plaintiff or cross-complainant to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto. brian mcnamara, utla. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Richard Burdge Jr. found that neither UTLA nor the two individual defendants Brian McNamara, UTLAs field and organizing director for field services, and Carl Joseph, the organizations representation coordinator/housed teachers representative for field services had violated plaintiff Astine Suleimanyans civil rights because she provided no evidence of any threat of physical violence. (a).) (Code Civ. Plaintiff also does not contend that the Individual Defendants are business establishments within the meaning of the Unruh Act, or demonstrate how her relationship with any of the defendants would be substantially similar to any of the specific categories outlined in Civil Code section 51.9, other than statements to this effect. (Separate Statement in Support of Motion (DSS), 27; Depo Exhibit 107 (Request to Approve Complaint).) Here, there is no evidence of such assurances. (a), (b).) 965-966.) 2 TO PRECLUDE EVIDENCE OF TRIAL WITNESS CARL JOSEPH'S 33- YEAR-OLD CONVICTIONS AND RELATED CHARACTER EVIDENCE, Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. There is no evidence that Mr. Sahota or anyone at DFEH ever represented to Plaintiff that her pre-Complaint inquiry constituted timely filing of her DFEH Complaint. WebView Brian McNamaras profile on LinkedIn, the worlds largest professional community. The court agrees with Defendants that the tenth cause of action is insufficiently pled and that Exhibit 1 to the FAC does not contain many of the terms under which she was employed, including a collective bargaining agreement referred in Exhibit 1 to the FAC. (Opposition, 9-10.) (Joseph) Plaintiff alleges that she was hired as a Political Organizer for UTLA on or about September 29, 2015 pursuant to a written employment agreement and that throughout her employment, she was subject to sexually harassing comments and conduct from McNamara and Joseph. Such actions allegedly included, for example, McNamara following Plaintiff around at a work conference and frequently raising his voice in an aggressive, threatening and demeaning manner, and Joseph allegedly telling Plaintiff he wanted to go down on her. (FAC 14(b), (c).). The purpose of a demurrer is to challenge the sufficiency of a pleading by raising questions of law. (Postley v. Harvey(1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 280, 286.) (Careau& Co v. Security Pacific Business Credit, Inc.(1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1371, 1394 (Careau).) (DSS 7-11; Depo Exhibit 210 at DFEH 00096-00105.) (Id. Defendants cite to, In opposition, Plaintiff contends that her Ralph Act claim does not fail because whether a reasonable person would have been intimidated by Defendants actions is a question of fact. (Id.) joan hopper william hopper's daughter; escape to the chateau boat hire; maria zhukova daughter of zhukov ), Third, with respect to Josephs sexually suggestive gestures, Plaintiff testified that it occurred when they were at a staff union retreat dinner. (Id. He rejected arguments by Suleimanyans attorney, Aaron Osten, that his clients efforts to file a timely complaint with the state Department of Fair Employment and Housing before suing were hampered by errors and misleading information given by DFEH employees. . or other characteristics. ), In opposition, Plaintiff contends the FAC sufficiently pleads a cause of action under the Bane Act because it sufficiently alleges threats made by the Individual Defendants at paragraph 14 and that such threats, read in the context of the abusive, hostile, sexually charged and aggressive work environment Plaintiff allegedly worked in, should be deemed sufficient to state a Bane Act cause of action. (Plaintiff Declaration 16.) CASE NAME: Astine Suleimanyan v. UTLA dba United Teachers Los Angeles, a California Organization, et al. Pursuant to Code Civ. By continuing to use this website, you agree to UniCourts General Disclaimer, Terms of Service, A contract is unenforceable if the parties fail to agree on a material term or if a material term is not reasonably certain. (Lindsay v. Lewandowski(2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1618, 1623. (Opposition, 11-14.). The trial court sustained the landlords demurrer without leave to amend, observing that the Complaint did not and cannot allege violence or threats of violence against plaintiffs or their property. Join Facebook to connect Additionally, Plaintiff asserts that the Ralph Act claim is not time-barred because Plaintiff gave Defendants notice of her claims for several years by filing internal UTLA complaints in 2016 and 2017 and by going to the DFEH in 2017 intending to receive a right to sue letter. For these reasons, Defendants motion is granted as to this issue. (Code Civ. (, Here, the FAC alleges that McNamara was the Field and Organizing Director for UTLA, while Joseph held the position of Representation/Coordinator/Housed Teachers Representative Field Services. (FAC. (Motion, 16-19.) (k).). Defendants allegedly breached this agreement by allowing Plaintiff to be discriminated against, sexually harassed, abused, retaliated against and ultimately discharged in November of 2019. (FAC 123.) DocketUpdated -- Tobin M. Lanzetta, Esq. (Plaintiff Decl.

Public Records Policy. On September 7, 2018, Mr. Sahota sent Plaintiff a draft complaint for signature. at 25:19-26:4.) In analyzing motions for summary judgment, courts must apply a three-step analysis: (1) identify the issues framed by the pleadings; (2) determine whether the moving party has negated the opponent's claims; and (3) determine whether the opposition has demonstrated the existence of a triable, material factual issue. (Hinesley v. Oakshade Town Center (2005) 135 Cal.App.4th 289, 294 (Hinesley).) Here, the FAC alleges that McNamara was the Field and Organizing Director for UTLA, while Joseph held the position of Representation/Coordinator/Housed Teachers Representative Field Services. (FAC 9-10.) at 1453, fn.