COLOR ME MINE COVINA TRIAL
On appeal, the City claims the trial court: (1) erred in concluding Briley was not required to exhaust his administrative remedies (2) committed various evidentiary errors at trial and (3) abused its discretion in failing to reduce the jury's excessive awards for noneconomic damages. The trial court later denied the City's motion for a new trial. The case proceeded to trial, and the jury found for Briley and awarded him about $4 million, including $2 million in past noneconomic damages and $1.5 million in future noneconomic damages. It found that the commission had no authority to consider Briley's retaliation claim, and that an appeal would have been futile because Whithorn and Freeland had been personally embroiled in appellant's matter. The City asked the trial court to dismiss Briley's action for failure to exhaust available administrative remedies, but the court concluded that an appeal to the HR Commission was unnecessary.
COLOR ME MINE COVINA CODE
He then filed this action against the City, alleging retaliation under Labor Code section 1102.5. However, Briley later abandoned the appeal, asserting, among other things, that the commission had no jurisdiction to consider his retaliation claims, and that the appeal procedure was futile and violated due process because Whithorn and Freeland were biased against him and had prejudged his claims. The commission was to hold an evidentiary hearing and deliver its findings and recommendations to Whithorn and City Manager Chris Freeland, who were the ultimate decisionmakers in the appeal. At the conclusion of this second investigation, Whithorn initiated Briley's termination, and another City official upheld the decision.īriley contended his termination was the result of retaliation for his prior complaints and initiated an appeal to the City's Human Resources Commission (HR Commission). While this investigation was still pending, the City commissioned an investigation of allegations that Briley had repeatedly engaged in misconduct and unprofessional behavior. The City commissioned an investigation of Briley's claims but ultimately concluded they were unfounded. He later complained that Whithorn and others had retaliated against him in various ways. During his employment, Briley complained that various City officials, including his then-direct superior Larry Whithorn, had ignored his reports of safety issues and engaged in misconduct. Respondent Jason Briley worked for appellant, the City of West Covina (the City), as a deputy fire marshal.
![color me mine covina color me mine covina](https://ikihfm.natulia.pl/templates/f16dc396e088c7c707eabe9d7479e7a2/img/91db979411ba6f604533591aaba9fc2f.jpg)
Wong for League of California Cities and California Special Districts Association as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Appellant. Jones & Mayer and Krista Macnevin Jee for Defendant and Appellant. Vacated in part, affirmed in part, and remanded with directions. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No.