Charles Antuna et al v. County of Los Angeles et al

Filing 407

SECOND AMENDED JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL by Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that final judgment in this action be entered as follows: 1. On the claims for First Amendment retaliation against Defendant Leroy B aca: Judgment is entered in favor of each Plaintiff and against Defendant Leroy Baca as follows, as well as costs and attorney's fees provided by law: a. Damages awarded Plaintiff David Waters: $128,000; b. Damages awarded Plaintiff Roc io Martinez: $798,000; c. Damages awarded Plaintiff Kevin Hebert: $83,000; d. Damages awarded Plaintiff Charles Antuna $96,000; e. Damages awarded Plaintiff Casey Dowling: $120,000; f. Damages awarded Plaintiff Robert Wheat: $120,000; g. Damages awarded Plaintiff Louis Duran: $120,000; h. Damages awarded Plaintiff Robert Tubbs: $73,000. (Refer to attached document for details.) (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (lom)

1

JS-6

2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

Case No. CV 14-5600-MWF (PLAx)

11

SECOND AMENDED JUDGMENT
AFTER TRIAL

CHARLES ANTUNA, et al.,
10
Plaintiffs,
vs.
12

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15
16

This action came on regularly for jury trial between November 11, 2015, and

17 December 15, 2015, in Courtroom 1600 of this United States District Court.
18 Plaintiffs were David Waters, Rocio Martinez, Kevin Hebert, Charles Antuna,
19 Casey Dowling, Robert Wheat, Louis Duran, and Robert Tubbs. Plaintiffs were
20 represented by Bradley Gage and Milad Sadr of the Law Offices of Goldberg &
21 Gage, as well as Stephen King of the Law Offices of Rodriguez & King.
22 Defendants the County of Los Angeles and Leroy Baca were represented by
23 attorneys George Peterson, Avi Burkwitz, and Sherry Gregorio of Peterson
24 Bradford Burkwitz LLP.
25

The jury deliberated and thereafter returned verdicts as follows:

26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
-1-

JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL

1 First Amendment Retaliation Claim: Asserted by All Plaintiffs
2

On each Plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claim, the jury returned a

3 verdict in favor of each Plaintiff and against Defendant Leroy Baca, awarding each
4 Plaintiff damages as follows:
5

1. Damages awarded Plaintiff David Waters:

6

Past and present non-economic damages: $80,000

7

Future non-economic damages: $3,000

8

Punitive damages: $45,000

9

TOTAL: $128,000

10

2. Damages awarded Plaintiff Rocio Martinez:

11

Past, present, and future medical damages: $3,000

12

Punitive damages: $45,000

13

TOTAL: $48,000

14

3. Damages awarded Plaintiff Kevin Hebert:

15

Past and present non-economic damages: $35,000

16

Future non-economic damages: $3,000

17

Punitive damages: $45,000

18

TOTAL: $83,000

19

4. Damages awarded Plaintiff Charles Antuna:

20

Past and present non-economic damages: $48,000

21

Future non-economic damages: $3,000

22

Punitive damages: $45,000

23

TOTAL: $96,000

24

5. Damages awarded Plaintiff Casey Dowling:

25

Past and present non-economic damages: $72,000

26

Future non-economic damages: $3,000

27

Punitive damages: $45,000

28

TOTAL: $120,000
-2-

JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL

1

6. Damages awarded Plaintiff Robert Wheat:

2

Past and present non-economic damages: $72,000

3

Future non-economic damages: $3,000

4

Punitive damages: $45,000

5

TOTAL: $120,000

6

7. Damages awarded Plaintiff Louis Duran:

7

Past and present non-economic damages: $72,000

8

Future non-economic damages: $3,000

9

Punitive damages: $45,000

10
11

TOTAL: $120,000
8. Damages awarded Plaintiff Robert Tubbs:

12

Past and present non-economic damages: $25,000

13

Future non-economic damages: $3,000

14

Punitive damages: $45,000

15

TOTAL: $73,000

16 Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (“POBRA”) Claims:
17 Asserted by All Plaintiffs but Rocio Martinez
18

On Plaintiffs David Waters, Kevin Hebert, Charles Antuna, Casey Dowling,

19 Robert Wheat, Louis Duran, and Robert Tubbs’ POBRA claims, the jury returned a
20 verdict in favor of Defendant County of Los Angeles.
21 Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) Retaliation and Failure to
22 Protect Claims: Asserted by Robert Tubbs
23

On Plaintiff Robert Tubbs’ FEHA retaliation and failure to protect claims,

24 the jury returned a verdict in favor of Defendant County of Los Angeles.
25

Separately, in an Order dated September 30, 2015, the Court dismissed each

26 Plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendant John Scott on
27 summary judgment. (Docket No. 135).
28 ///
-3-

JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL

1

On February 22, 2016, the Court granted Plaintiff Rocio Martinez’s Motion

2 for New Trial on the issue of non-economic damages, which had been
3 inadvertently omitted from Plaintiff Rocio Martinez’s special verdict form in the
4 previous jury trial. (Docket No. 343). The issue of non-economic damages for
5 Plaintiff Rocio Martinez’s successful First Amendment retaliation claim against
6 Defendant Leroy Baca came on regularly for jury trial between June 7 and 9, 2016,
7 in Courtroom 1600 of this United States District Court. Plaintiff Rocio Martinez
8 was represented by Bradley Gage and Milad Sadr of the Law Offices of Goldberg
9 & Gage. Defendant Leroy Baca was represented by attorneys George Peterson,
10 Avi Burkwitz, and Sherry Gregorio of Peterson Bradford Burkwitz LLP.
11

The jury deliberated and thereafter returned a verdict as follows:

12 Non-Economic Damages for Plaintiff Rocio Martinez’s First Amendment
13 Retaliation Claim
14

The jury returned a verdict in favor of Plaintiff Rocio Martinez and against

15 Defendant Leroy Baca, awarding Plaintiff Rocio Martinez non-economic damages
16 as follows:
17

Past and present non-economic damages: $750,000

18

Future non-economic damages: $0

19

TOTAL: $750,000

20

Now, therefore, pursuant to Rules 54 and 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil

21 Procedure, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that
22 final judgment in this action be entered as follows:
23

1.

On the claims for First Amendment retaliation against Defendant Leroy

24

Baca: Judgment is entered in favor of each Plaintiff and against

25

Defendant Leroy Baca as follows, as well as costs and attorney’s fees as

26

provided by law:

27

a. Damages awarded Plaintiff David Waters: $128,000

28

b. Damages awarded Plaintiff Rocio Martinez: $798,000
-4-

JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL

1

c. Damages awarded Plaintiff Kevin Hebert: $83,000

2

d. Damages awarded Plaintiff Charles Antuna: $96,000

3

e. Damages awarded Plaintiff Casey Dowling: $120,000

4

f. Damages awarded Plaintiff Robert Wheat: $120,000

5

g. Damages awarded Plaintiff Louis Duran: $120,000

6

h. Damages awarded Plaintiff Robert Tubbs: $73,000

7

2.

On the claims for First Amendment retaliation against Defendant John

8

Scott: Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant John Scott, and each

9

Plaintiff shall take nothing on his or her claim against Defendant John

10
11

Scott by his or her Second Amended Complaint.
3.

On Plaintiffs David Waters, Kevin Hebert, Charles Antuna, Casey

12

Dowling, Robert Wheat, Louis Duran, and Robert Tubbs’s claim for

13

POBRA violations: Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant County

14

of Los Angeles, and these Plaintiffs shall take nothing on these claims

15

by their Second Amended Complaint.

16

4.

On Plaintiff Robert Tubbs’ claims for FEHA retaliation and failure to

17

protect: Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant County of Los

18

Angeles, and Plaintiff Robert Tubbs shall take nothing on these claims

19

by his Second Amended Complaint.

20
21

Dated: June 24, 2016
22

_______________________________
MICHAEL W. FITZGERALD
United States District Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28
-5-

JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL