2014-00157006-CU-OE

Dolores Sanchez vs. California Federation of Teachers

Nature of Proceeding:   Motion to Strike First Amended Complaint for Damages

Filed By:  Manansala, Jannah V.

Defendants’ motion to strike portions of the first amended complaint (“FAC”) is
DENIED.

This case presents an employment dispute.  Plaintiff Dolores Sanchez (“Plaintiff”)
alleges that Defendants passed her over for a promotion in favor of a younger, more
inexperienced candidate.  Plaintiff also alleges instances of retaliation, a policy of age
discrimination, and instances of disability discrimination.  The FAC contains nine
causes of action under the FEHA, the CFRA or the common law.

Defendants’ current motion focuses on two paragraphs among Plaintiff’s extensive
allegations.  Both paragraphs contain allegations that, when Plaintiff attempted to
return to work after a leave of absence, Defendant California Federation of Teachers
offered her a severance package if she resigned.  (See SAC, ¶¶ 71, 74.)  These
paragraphs contain the additional allegation that each offer of severance demonstrated
a desire not to have Plaintiff return to work.  (Id.)  Defendants move the court to strike
the paragraphs in question on grounds that they are irrelevant and improper.

Specifically, Defendants contend that the subject paragraphs disclose offers of
compromise in contravention of Evidence Code § 1152.  Acknowledging that the offers
in the paragraphs in question were not made in response to any then-existing legal
claims, Defendants cite authority for the proposition that no such claims need be
pending for Evidence Code § 1152 to apply.

Plaintiff counters that the offers relate to non-liability issues and, therefore, that the
allegations should not be stricken.

In its discretion, the court denies the motion because Evidence Code § 1152 renders
inadmissible certain evidence of liability; it is not directed at the sufficiency of
allegations in a pleading.  Accordingly, determinations about the propriety of
information related to offers of severance are better made during evidentiary phases of
the case, not during the pleading stage.

The court does not address the parties’ additional arguments in favor of and in
opposition to the motion.  Likewise, the court expresses no opinion about the
admissibility of any evidence that might be introduced later in this case.

The minute order is effective immediately.  No formal order pursuant to CRC 3.1312 or
further notice is required.