Former Senior Vice Presidnet Receives Largest Wrongful Termination Lawsuit Verdict in LA County

When a former senior vice president filed suit against Farmers Insurance Group for wrongful termination, the result is believed to be the third-largest such verdict in the state and the largest in Los Angeles County.

The Case: Andrew Rudnicki vs. Farmers Insurance Exchange et al

The Court: CA Superior Court - Los Angeles County

The Case No.: CVPS2200395

The Plaintiff: Andrew Rudnicki vs. Farmers Insurance Exchange et al

Rudnicki was employed at Farmers for 37 years at the time of his termination. He started as a trial attorney in 1979. According to his August 2017 complaint, he rose from supervising attorney to senior vice president in 2013. At that point, Rudnicki was being prepared to offer his deposition testimony in Coates v. Farmers Insurance Group Inc., an equal pay case in California federal court. His testimony included knowledge about past sex bias in the companies’ legal group and withheld pay data. Instead, farmers fired him in retaliation for the testimony he was prepared to offer in the class pay bias lawsuit by the companies’ female in-house lawyers. Rudnicki filed a wrongful termination lawsuit in response to the situation.

The Defendant: Andrew Rudnicki vs. Farmers Insurance Exchange et al

In the end, the Coates case was settled. And according to Rudnicki’s complaint, the number of women in management positions in the legal department rose significantly during his tenure as vice president.

Details of the Case: Andrew Rudnicki vs. Farmers Insurance Exchange et al

The court’s findings in Andrew Rudnicki vs. Farmers Insurance Exchange et al. varied. Based on the merits of the wrongful termination lawsuit (and additional claims included in the complaint), a California Superior Court judge awarded Rudnicki over $155 million. Specifically, the jury found that Rudnicki’s role as a potential witness in the Coates case served as substantial motivation for his firing and awarded him $3.4M in past economic damages, $1M in future economic damages, and $1M in noneconomic damages. In addition, the jury found the retaliation in violation of multiple state laws. The jury did reject Rudnicki’s claim that age discrimination and disability discrimination played a part in his termination.

If you have questions about California employment law or if you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys can assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Former Farmers Insurance Attorney Awarded $155 Million by Jury in California Retaliation Suit

California employment law, California employment law attorney, California employment law office, California employment law firm, unpaid overtime, overtime lawsuit, la overtime lawsuit, la unpaid overtime lawsuit, California unpaid overtime lawsuit, C

A jury awarded a former Farmers Insurance Attorney that sued for wrongful termination and retaliation $155 million.

The Case: Andrew Rudnicki v. Farmers Insurance Exchange and Farmers Insurance Group

The Court: Superior Court for the State of California, County of Los Angeles, Central District

The Case No.: BC630158

The Plaintiff: Andrew Rudnicki

The plaintiff in the case, Andrew Rudnicki, ran Farmers Insurance’s in-house branch legal offices. He claims he was wrongfully terminated and that other civil rights of his were also violated. Rudnicki describes the decision to terminate his employment as discriminatory or retaliatory. According to the lawsuit, Rudnicki was with Farmers for 37 years before he was fired. He started as a trial attorney in 1979 and rose from supervising attorney to senior vice president.

The Defendant: Farmers Insurance & Farmers Insurance Group

When Rudnicki was being prepared to offer deposition testimony in another case, Coates v. Farmers Insruance Group Inc., the trouble started. Rudnicki was aware of certain pay data that the company withheld that probably instigated the Coates case, an equal pay case in California federal court. Rudnicki had information regarding sex bias occurring in the companies’ legal departments, as well. The Coates was eventually settled, and Rudnicki pointed out that he played a part in significantly increasing the number of women in management jobs during his tenure as vice president.

Details About the Case: Andrew Rudnicki v. Farmers Insurance Exchange and Farmers Insurance Group

According to the jury, Rudnicki’s role as a witness (or a potential witness) in the sex bias case was a substantial motivating factor behind his termination from Farmer’s. The jury’s verdict came down in favor of Rudnick including $150 million in punitive damages. It’s been said the $150 million award is the third-largest of its kind in the state and the largest ever seen in Los Angeles County.

If you have questions about California employment law or if you need to file a class action wage and hour lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

A Former Sony IT Security Analyst Seeks Class Action Status in Gender Discrimination Suit

A former Sony IT Security Analyst, Emma Majo, seeks class-action status in a gender discrimination lawsuit.

The Case: Emma Majo v. Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC

The Court: District Court for the Northern District of California

The Case No.: 3:21-cv-09054

The Plaintiff: Emma Majo

Emma Majo, the plaintiff in the case, sued Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC, the maker of Playstation, for gender discrimination and wrongful termination. Majo states she was employed by Sony starting in 2015 and that during her time at the company she saw bias against women regarding promotions and that she stayed in the same position with no promotion for six years (although she frequently put in requests). She also claims that some male supervisors would not speak to women with the door closed, and that if there was a male coworker present, they would only speak to him rather than the female employee.

The Defendant: Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC

Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC, the Defendant in the case, is the maker of the popular Playstation gaming console. Their former IT security analyst, Emma Majo, claims the Defendant did not pay women equally to their male coworkers with similar job duties, and titles. She also claims that women were denied promotions and that the company tolerated and even cultivated a workplace environment that discriminated against female workers.

Summary of the Case: Emma Majo v. Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC

According to Majo’s, she submitted a signed statement advising Sony of the discrimination in 2021. She claims that “soon after” she submitted the signed statement, Sony fired her. Sony claims Majo’s dismissal was due to the elimination of a department, but the plaintiff claims it was unrelated; stating that she was not even a part of the department they are referencing.

If you have questions about California employment law or if you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

California Federal Jury Awards Former Walmart Pharmacist $27M in Wrongful Termination Suit

A federal jury in California awarded a former Walmart pharmacist $27 million in total damages, agreeing with the plaintiff in the case that the retail giant wrongfully terminated the employee after she voiced concerns about Medicare law violations.

The Case: Afrouz Nikmanesh v. Wal-mart Stores, Inc.

The Court: U.S. District Court, Central District of California

The Case No.: e 8:15-cv-00202-JGB-JCG

The Plaintiff: Afrouz Nikmanesh v. Wal-mart Stores, Inc.

Afrouz Nikmanesh, the plaintiff in the case, is a former pharmacist employed by Walmart Stores, Inc. According to court documents, Nikmanesh was fired after complaining that the company broke Medicare laws.

The Defendant: Afrouz Nikmanesh v. Wal-mart Stores, Inc.

According to former Walmart pharmacist, Afrouz Nikmanesh, Walmart, the Defendant in the case, failed to report required data to the Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System (CURES program). The database contains information on controlled substance prescriptions dispensed throughout the state of California, and pharmacists are required to file weekly reports with the California Department of Justice.

The Case: Afrouz Nikmanesh v. Wal-mart Stores, Inc.

Nikmanesh alleges she reported the violations to her supervisors between July 2013 and September 2014 and requested they be investigated and corrected to comply with the law. According to the plaintiff, Walmart’s response was to fire her in September of 2014. Nikmanesh claims the firing was solely in retaliation for her reporting and complaining about the company’s failure to comply with state law. According to the plaintiff, Walmart’s failure to report required data to the CURES program was not their only violation. She claims they also violated state law by charging Medicare beneficiaries more than the Medi-Cal reimbursement rate for prescriptions, and failing to offer eligible Medicare patients their discount. A jury of 8 unanimously found that Nikmanesh’s reporting of Walmart overcharging Medicare customers (over 65 and those under 65 who have disabilities) for prescriptions, and not complying with reporting requirements for controlled substance disbursements to the Department of Justice under the CURES system created a substantial motivating factor for Walmart’s decision to terminate her employment in retaliation for her actions. A federal judge awarded the former Walmart pharmacist with $27 million in total damages in agreement that Walmart wrongfully fired her for complaining about Medicare law violations ($40,000 for economic losses, $100,000 for non-economic losses, $60,000 for future non-economic losses, and $27.3 million in punitive damages).

If you have questions about California employment law or if you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

A Rosemead, California McDonald’s Employee Claims She was Fired in Retaliation

Ashley Lopez, a former McDonald’s Shift Manager in Rosemead, California, claims she was pressured to violate state child labor laws and fulfill illegal demands from her employer. When she refused, Lopez claimed she was fired in retaliation.

The Case: Ashley Lopez vs M. Pernecky Management Corp.

The Court: Los Angeles County Superior Court

The Case No.: 21STCV31912

The Plaintiff: Ashley Lopez vs M. Pernecky Management Corp.

Ashley Lopez worked at a McDonald’s franchise run by M. Pernecky Management Corp. in Rosemead, California. Lopez claims that during her time as an employee she was pressured to violate State child labor laws, and to fulfill other unlawful demands by her employer. She claims that she pushed back against the demands, even reporting the violations to a corporate manager of the franchisee. She was allegedly fired as a result.

The Defendant: Ashley Lopez vs M. Pernecky Management Corp.

M. Pernecky Management Corp. runs a McDonald’s franchise in Rosemead, California at which the plaintiff, Ashley Lopez, was employed as a Shift Manager.

The Case: Ashley Lopez vs M. Pernecky Management Corp.

According to the lawsuit, Lopez’s problems with the Rosemead McDonald’s Store Manager, Cesar Reyes, did not begin until after he promoted her to Shift Manager. At the time of her promotion, Lopez was 16 years old. Lopez claims that after her promotion, Reyes regularly stopped complying with California state labor laws limiting the number of hours a minor can work. Lopez claims that Reyes frequently demanded she miss school or stay late on school nights to complete shifts that were illegally long considering the fact that she was a minor. According to the lawsuit, Reyes would insinuate that failure to comply with the illegal demands put Lopez’s job in jeopardy. Lopez also claims she was required to be on-call days she was not scheduled to work, some of which were school days. She also says she was required to work odd hours forcing her to miss even more school. In addition to missing school, Lopez claims she was pushed to skip doctor’s appointments. For instance, when she called out due to an emergency medical procedure, her manager, Reyes, allegedly responded by saying he might have been wrong in making her manager. According to Lopez, she brought the issue up with Operations Supervisor Ruben Duran, Reyes’ supervisor, but no action was taken. After she made the complaints, Lopez claims Reyes fired her. Lopez further claims that when she attempted to appeal the termination to Duran, he was hostile and ultimately sided with Reyes on the matter.

If you have questions about California employment law or if you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Small California Christian Nursing School Faces Allegations of Retaliation and Wrongful Termination in Court

Small California Christian Nursing School Faces Allegations of Retaliation and Wrongful Termination in Court.jpg

Two former professors filed a wrongful termination lawsuit against a small, Christian California Nursing School alleging retaliation, and wrongful termination.

The Case: Anita Bralock v. American University of Health Sciences Inc.

The Court: Los Angeles County Superior Court

The Case No.: BC614955

The Plaintiff: Bralock v. American University

The plaintiffs in the case, Anita Bralock and Brandon Fryman, are two former professors at American University. The professors filed a wrongful termination lawsuit claiming they were fired from their jobs at the university for investigating students’ claims of sexual harassment against the school’s founder, ​​Pastor Gregory Johnson. The plaintiffs claim that Johnson and the American University of Health Sciences retaliated against them after they (along with a 3rd faculty member) launched investigations into multiple students’ complaints alleging sexually inappropriate behavior from the school’s founder, Johnson.

The Defendant: Bralock v. American University

American University, a small (approx. 300 students), Christian nursing school founded in California in 1993, and its founder, Johnson, deny the allegations and maintain that the plaintiffs were fired from their positions at the school because they had plans to start a competing school and when American University attempted to investigate their activities regarding the matter, the two would not cooperate.

More About the Case: Bralock v. American University

The wrongful termination suit between two former professors and a small California Christian nursing school proceeded to jury trial. A California state court jury heard opening statements in the case. Since the school receives federal funding, it is required to adhere to Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in educational settings. The plaintiffs’ counsel also noted that the founder, Johnson, filled an unusually significant number of administrative roles for American University, including the Title IX Coordinator, which made it awkward for students who wished to raise concerns or make allegations related to Johnson’s own behavior.

Incidents Leading to the Wrongful Termination: Bralock v. American University

When nursing students brought complaints of unwanted touching or inappropriate comments to Fryman, he turned to Bralock, as the dean of the nursing school, and a third faculty member. Together, the three faculty members met with the nursing student who made the original complaint at an off-campus location to discuss the claims. According to the plaintiffs, when Johnson learned of the situation, the investigations were taken over by his attorney and according to allegations, they were quickly buried. Not long after, Fryman’s salary was cut by 50%. Then both Fryman and Bralock were fired after an investigation that was allegedly related to their involvement in a business plan to start a competing school. The plaintiffs claim this was a cover for the unlawful retaliation in connection to the Title IX investigation. The University’s counsel claims that Fryman and Bralock were actively involved in plans to start a competing school, and that the school was within their rights to fire employees involved in plans that supported a competitor. The defendant’s counsel also accused the plaintiffs of creating a false narrative because there was nothing else they could legally do for getting caught attempting to work against their current employer.

If you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, or you have questions about employment law violations, get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP today. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Former Partner Alleges Wrongful Termination After Reporting Unlawful Activity

Former Partner Alleges Wrongful Termination After Reporting Unlawful Activit.jpg

A former Dentons partner claims he was wrongfully terminated from his job after he reported that the firm allegedly forged a document in an attempt to transfer millions in dollars of client funds.

The Case: Zhang v. Dentons U.S. LLP

The Court: California Central District Court

The Case No.: 2:21-cv-04682

The Plaintiff: Zhang vs. Dentons

Jinshu John Zhang, a corporate attorney, was a Dentons partner in the international legal giant’s Los Angeles office. Zhang alleges that he was wrongfully terminated from his position. According to the suit, Zhang reported that the firm forged a document attempting to transfer millions of dollars from a Chinese client. Zhang also alleges bias based on Chinese race or his national origin. The dispute appears to have started over determining Zhang’s share of a “large award of attorneys’ fees” related to a multi-million dollar settlement for a foreign arbitration Zhang handled for a client based in the People’s Republic of China.

The Defendant: Zhang vs. Dentons

The defendant in the case, Dentons, argues that Zhang was fired for cause. The firm alleges that they terminated Zhang for cause on May 5 and immediately entered into arbitration with the plaintiff to attempt to collect the contingency fee award, but Zhang initiated a state court lawsuit against the firm during the dispute resolution process, which violated his partnership agreement with the firm. According to court documents, Zhang continued to participate in arbitration proceedings, but abruptly withdrew from arbitration when an adverse ruling was issued on May 26, 2021. Dentons claims Zhang breached his employment contract by attempting to directly negotiate his share of the award with the client. However, Zhang claims Dentons committed fraud by directing its attorneys to forge the client’s signature to initiate a funds transfer.

Details About the Case: Zhang vs. Dentons

Dentons brought arbitration proceedings against Zhang followed by Zhang suing in California state court alleging Chinese-based employment bias. Dentons removed the state case to federal court alleging jurisdiction based on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and the Federal Arbitration Act. However, on June 11th Judge Klausner concluded that the case belongs in state court because the firm failed to show jurisdiction was proper under the New York Convention and the FAA does not separately confer jurisdiction to federal court. While the convention does govern international arbitration agreements, the agreement at issue in the case is actually the employment agreement (and its arbitration clause) between Dentons and Zhang, not the arbitration agreement the client sued under regarding the foreign matter (which was previously settled). Since the employment agreement is between two US citizens, the matter does not fall under federal jurisdiction.

If you have questions about California employment law or if you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.