Case Number: BC534353    Hearing Date: July 21, 2014    Dept: 46

Posted 7-17-2014 at 2:30 p.m.
Regarding Calendar Matter #8 on 7-21-2014

Case Number: BC534353
SHEENA FREDERICK VS PACWEST SECURITY SERVICES ET AL
Filing Date: 01/27/2014
Case Type: Wrongful Termination (General Jurisdiction)

07/21/2014

TENTATIVE RULING: The demurrer is unopposed. PSMG, Inc. dba Pacwest Security Services (erroneously sued as Pacwest Security Services’s Demurrer to Complaint is SUSTAINED per CCP §§430.10(e)-(g), 430.30 and 430.50 as to the 1st and 2nd Causes of Action [COA] in Plaintiff’s complaint, on the basis that they both fail to state facts sufficient to constitute COAs and are uncertain. Plaintiff shall have 20 days leave to amend. Motion to strike is ordered off calendar as moot.

1. The 1/27/14 Complaint contains two causes of action: (1) Wrongful Termination in Violation of CA Family Rights Act and Medical Care Leave Act; and, (2) Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy against Ds PSMG, Inc. dba Pacwest Security Services (erroneously sued as Pacwest Security Services) (hereinafter, “Pacwest”); Alcoa Fastening Systems (hereinafter, “Alcoa”) and DOES 1-50.

2. The 1st COA: Wrongful Termination in Violation of CA Family Rights Act and Medical Care
Leave Act is defective and therefore the demurrers are sustained. The CA Supreme Court has established four requirements for wrongful termination in violation of public policy claims:

“’First, the policy must be supported by either constitutional or statutory provisions. Second, the policy must be “public” in the sense that it “inures to the benefit of the public” rather than serving merely the interests of the individual. Third, the policy must have been articulated at the time of the discharge. Fourth, the policy must be “fundamental” and “substantial.”’ (Stevenson v. Superior Court [(1997)] 16 C.4th 880, 889-890, fn. omitted.)” Ross v. RagingWire Telecommunications, Inc. (2008) 42 C.4th 920, 932.

The label on the First Cause of Action indicates that Plaintiff relies on the California Family Rights Act and Medical Care Leave Act for this COA. However, the face page of the complaint and ¶9 therein indicate that she is also relying upon FEHA, the ADA and the CA Government Code. She has not, however, identified any particular provisions in the aforesaid Acts and/or Codes which were purportedly violated. The nature of the claim is therefore vague and confusing.

3. “The claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy requires [P] to prove (1) he was employed by [the D], (2) [the D] discharged him, (3) the alleged violation of public policy was a motivating reason for the discharge, and (4) the discharge caused him harm.” Haney v. Aramark Uniform Services, Inc. (2004) 121 C.A.4th 623, 641. However, Plaintiff has alleged only that:

“8. Plaintiff was employed by Defendants. During her employment she suffered complications from her pregnancy which required that she take a leave mandated by the Family Medical Care Leave act as well as the California Family Rights Act and California Government Code. Defendants were required to reinstate Plaintiff to her position upon her return. Pacwest refused to do this even though the same position was still available. Instated [sic] Pacwest terminated Plaintiff and refused to engage in the interactive process when plaintiff informed Pacwest upon her return that she had anemia which she contracted as a result of the pregnancy and therefore needed to wear two jackets at work. Instead of allowing Plaintiff to wear two jackets she was terminated for this sole reason. At the time of her termination defendant Alcoa was a joint employer who participated in the decision to remove Plaintiff from her position as a result of her request for an accommodation.” (Complaint, ¶ 8).

However, the claim is incomplete in that Plaintiff does not provide this court or D with any factual information regarding the position she held at the time of her leave, the length of her leave, the date of her return to work, her new position and the date of her termination.

4. The 2nd COA: Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy fails for the reasons set forth above.

5. Motion to Strike. Based upon the ruling made above, the Motion To Strike is taken off calendar as being moot.

Posted 7-18-2014 at 11:20 a.m.
Regarding the Case Mangement Conference

Case Number: BC534353
SHEENA FREDERICK VS PACWEST SECURITY SERVICES ET AL
Filing Date: 01/27/2014
Case Type: Wrongful Termination (General Jurisdiction)

07/21/2014

Conference-Case Management

Matter to be set for jury trial on 06/17/2015 at 9:30 a.m. and a final status conference on 06/02/2015 at 8:30 a.m. Jury fees were posted by defendant Pacwest.

The parties agree to mediation. The court orders the parties to select a mutually agreeable mediator by 12/17/2014, complete mediation by 4/07/2015 and then return to court for post-mediation conference on 4/08/2015 at 8:30 a.m. in Dept. 46.

The parties are to comply with the CMC order which is issued separately.

This ruling and the CMC order are posted on-line. No appearance is necessary if, after meeting and conferring regarding the tentative ruling, the parties both agree to the dates and times set for trial, the parties waive further notice of this trial, and one party calls the court and informs the court that the parties agree and that both parties waive notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED:

______________________________
Frederick C. Shaller, Judge

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
Case Number: BC534353
SHEENA FREDERICK VS PACWEST SECURITY SERVICES ET AL

Trial and Final Status Conference

Trial is set for 6/17/2015 at 9:30 a.m. in Department 46.

Final Status Conference is set for 6/02/2015 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 46.

Jury Instructions and Verdict Form

The Court settles jury instruction and the verdict form at the Final Status Conference. A jury panel will not be ordered until the instructions and verdict form are settled.
Counsel and self-represented parties with authority to agree on jury instructions and the verdict form shall meet and confer in person within thirty (30) days of the Final Status Conference regarding jury instructions and a special verdict form with interrogatories. All counsel and self-represented parties shall bring to that meeting their requested jury instructions and special verdict form with interrogatories.
As required by LASC Local Rule 3.25(g)(7), counsel and self-represented parties shall present at the Final Status Conference one joint set of agreed jury instructions, one joint set of disputed jury instructions and one joint agreed special verdict with interrogatories. Jury instructions must be formatted as required by Cal. Rules of Court (CRC) 2.1055.
Any disputed jury instructions that is not a form instruction as approved by BAJI or CACI shall contain a citation to the case in support of the instruction with a page citation to the portion of the case that supports the instruction. If federal or out-of-state citations are included, a copy of the entire case must be lodged with the court in accordance with CRC 3.1113(i).

Motions in Limine

Motions in limine shall be noticed pursuant to CCP §1005(b) to be hear at the Final Status Conference and shall comply with LASC Rules 3.25(g)(2) and 3.57.

Counsel shall seek and obtain from the Court an alternate briefing schedule if it is not possible to notice a motion in limine for the Final Status Conference on 16 days notice, such as motions in limine regarding expert witnesses.

Witness and Exhibit Lists

Witness and exhibits lists shall be filed and served in compliance with LASC Local Rule 3.25(f)(1).

Alternative Dispute Resolution

The parties have agreed to mediate. Counsel shall select the mediator by 12/17/2014. The mediation shall be completed by 4/7/2015. Post-Mediation status conference is set for 04/08/2015 at 8:30 a.m. in Dept. 46.
All parties including persons with authority to settle, and lead trial counsel shall be physically present at the mediation. Insurance claims representatives assigned to the file and located in California shall be physically present. Insurance claims representatives assigned to the file and located outside California shall be available by telephone during the entire mediation.
Counsel participating in any form of alternative dispute resolution shall comply with CRC 3.1380(b). The mediator has no authority to make any exceptions to this order.

Motions

Objections to evidence filed in connection with any motion shall be in the format required by CRC 3.1354(b). Counsel shall lodge a proposed order on objections in the format specified in CRC 3.1354(c). Objections must be filed and proposed orders lodged at the time of the opposition or reply brief or objections will be waived.
All citations to federal or out of state authorities shall be accompanied by lodged out of state authorities in the format specified by CRC 3.1113(i).
No more than one (1) summary judgment/adjudication to be filed per party.

Trial

On the first date of trial, all counsel and self-represented parties will bring to court five sets of three ring binders containing exhibits. Exhibits must be sequentially numbered, starting from the number 1, on the lower right side of each page.
Counsel and self-represented parties are to assign trial exhibit numbers so there are no duplicate exhibit numbers.
Counsel and self-represented parties are ordered to meet and confer so that exhibits not in dispute can be admitted at the beginning of each party’s case.
Counsel and, where applicable, parties and witnesses, shall comply with LASC Local Rules 3.70 – 3.193.

IT IS SO ORDERED:

Dated: _______________________________
FREDERICK C. SHALLER
Judge of the Superior Court