LLOYD v. LOS ANGELES PART I
Plaintiff and appellant Dartheatus Lloyd (Lloyd) appeals a judgment following a grant of summary judgment in favor of his former employer, defendant and respondent County of Los Angeles (the County). The essential issues presented are whether Lloyds action is barred by a failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and if not, whether a triable issue of material fact exists so as to preclude summary judgment. Lloyds claim he suffered a retaliatory dismissal for whistleblower activity did not constitute a claim of discrimination on the basis of a non-merit factor within the meaning of rule 25.01 of the Countys Civil Service Rules (rules). Therefore, Lloyd was not required to exhaust his administrative remedies under the Countys internal rules. In the unpublished portion of the opinion, we address the merits of Lloyds other causes of action. Court conclude the County met its burden to establish a legitimate justification for its employment decisions, and that Lloyd failed to raise a triable issue of material fact as to whether the Countys reasons were pretextual. Therefore, the judgment is affirmed.
Comments on LLOYD v. LOS ANGELES PART I