Encinas v. Burton
Plaintiff and appellant Thomas Encinas appeals from a judgment following an order granting summary judgment in favor of defendants and respondents Brent Burton and the County of Los Angeles in this action arising from Encinas's reports of misconduct. Encinas contends: 1) triable issues of fact exist as to his cause of action for a hostile work environment based on widespread favoritism shown to Black employees in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.); 2) triable issues of fact exist as to his claim of retaliation in violation of the FEHA; 3) Burton can be held individually liable for retaliation under the FEHA; 4) the trial court erred by excluding certain evidence; 5) the trial court erred by sustaining a demurrer to his cause of action for violation of Labor Code section 1102.5 (the whistleblower statute) without leave to amend and subsequently refusing to allow leave to amend based on newly discovered evidence; and 6) the amount of costs awarded was excessive.
We conclude that no triable issues of fact exist as to the causes of action for a hostile work environment or retaliation under the FEHA. However, the allegations of the complaint that Encinas was subject to adverse employment actions as a result of reporting conduct to his employer which violated criminal statutes were sufficient to state a cause of action for violation of Labor Code section 1102.5. The demurrer to the cause of action for violation of Labor Code section 1102.5 should have been overruled. Therefore, we reverse the judgment with directions.
Comments on Encinas v. Burton