San Diego Partner Geoffrey Lee secured summary adjudication of the majority of claims in a whistleblower and wrongful termination case in San Diego County Superior Court.
A former vice president alleged that she was wrongfully terminated. Her primary allegation was that she was terminated in retaliation for reporting a health and food safety violation by implying that the child of an executive brought a communicable disease into the workplace where food is manufactured. The judge initially found the timing suspicious because the sanitation complaint was made a day before the vice president was effectively demoted. The defense demonstrated to the court that the unrebutted evidence showed that the plan to demote the plaintiff’s position due to poor performance had already been in process for weeks prior. The plaintiff’s secondary allegation was that she was wrongfully terminated a few days shy of her vesting of corporate stock for the malicious purpose of denying her that stock. The defense argued before the court that this is not a recognized tort in California even if that intent were proven.
The court also dismissed an array of Labor Code claims premised on the theory that failure to award the stock or some prorated amount was tantamount to failure to pay wages. The court appreciated the analogy comparing a partial right to stock to a partially earned bonus or commission but ultimately ruled that stock cannot constitute wages if the dollar amount is not fixed and ascertainable. The stock here was not capable of immediate valuation because its full vesting was dependent on a third-party future purchase of the company. The judge initially issued a tentative ruling on the motion for summary judgment, denying summary adjudication regarding the two wrongful termination claims. However, following an intense oral argument lasting almost an hour, the judge reversed his initial ruling and dismissed the wrongful termination claims.
The client is particularly pleased with the outcome, especially considering the challenging beginning of the case. Initially, the EPL insurance carrier assigned defense to a law firm, which later dissolved, leaving the case unattended for five months. GRSM stepped in and promptly rectified the situation.
Although two small claims survived summary judgment, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed them, resulting in a complete victory for the client.