Ortiz et al v. Alvarez et al

Filing 217

FINAL PRETRIAL ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 09/05/2019. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

LUIS RAMOS; GUDELIA SANDOVAL;
ALFONSO PADRON; and ELIDA
PADRON,

13

Plaintiffs,

14
15
16

No. 1:15-cv-00535-DAD-EPG

FINAL PRETRIAL ORDER

v.
GERARDO ALVAREZ, in his official and
individual capacities; and PARLIER
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,

17

Defendants.

18
On August 5, 2019, the court conducted a final pretrial conference. Attorney Alexia

19
20

Kirkland appeared as counsel for plaintiffs Luis Ramos and Gudelia Sandoval. Plaintiffs Elida

21

Padron and Alfonso Padron appeared on their own behalves. Attorney Mart Oller appeared as

22

counsel for defendants Parlier Unified School District (“PUSD”) and Gerardo Alvarez. Having

23

considered defendants’ objections, the court issues this final pretrial order.
Plaintiffs bring this action under state and federal law alleging that defendant Alvarez,

24
25

while acting as the PUSD Superintendent, solicited political campaign contributions in exchange

26

for terms of employment, used PUSD funds to support certain political candidates, and took

27

adverse employment actions against plaintiffs based on their political affiliations. Plaintiffs

28

/////
1

1

further allege that PUSD approved, through its school board, defendant Alvarez’s decisions

2

without affording plaintiffs due process.

3

I.

4
5

Jurisdiction is predicated on 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343, and 1367. Jurisdiction is not
contested.

6
7

Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391. Venue is not contested.
II.

8
9

JURISDICTION/VENUE

JURY
Both parties have demanded a jury trial. The jury will consist of eight jurors.

III.

10

UNDISPUTED FACTS
1.

Defendants did not have an employment relationship with Alfonso Padron at all

11

relevant times with respect to the matters alleged in the complaint, and thus, Alfonso Padron was

12

not subjected to an adverse employment action by defendants.

13
14

2.

The non-renewal of Elida Padron’s employment contract was not substantially

motivated by her protected First Amendment conduct.

15

3.

Gudelia Sandoval was an employee of defendant PUSD.

16

4.

Luis Ramos was employed with the Community Union Parenting Center, which

17

provided services for parents at the Parent Resource Center at PUSD.

18

IV.

DISPUTED FACTUAL ISSUES
Whether defendants violated any of plaintiffs’ rights under the law in relation to

19

1.

20

the claims pled.

21

V.

22

DISPUTED EVIDENTIARY ISSUES/MOTIONS IN LIMINE
The parties have not yet filed motions in limine. The court does not encourage the filing

23

of motions in limine unless they are addressed to issues that can realistically be resolved by the

24

court prior to trial and without reference to the other evidence which will be introduced by the

25

parties at trial. Any motions in limine the parties elect to file shall be filed no later than 21 days

26

before trial. Opposition shall be filed no later than 14 days before trial and any replies shall be

27

filed no later than 10 days before trial. Upon receipt of any opposition briefs, the court will

28

notify the parties if it will hear argument on any motions in limine prior to the first day of trial.
2

1

VI.

SPECIAL FACTUAL INFORMATION

2
3

None.
VII.

4

RELIEF SOUGHT
Plaintiffs seek general and special damages against defendant PUSD and defendant

5

Alvarez and punitive damages against defendant Alvarez in his individual capacity.

6

VIII.

7

POINTS OF LAW
The claims and defenses arise under both federal and state law. The first cause of action

8

for intentional infliction of emotional distress is brought by all plaintiffs against both defendants.

9

The second cause of action for defamation is brought by plaintiffs Gudelia Sandoval and Luis

10

Ramos against both defendants. The third cause of action for invasion of privacy/false light is

11

brought by plaintiffs Gudelia Sandoval and Luis Ramos against both defendants. The fourth

12

cause of action for invasion of privacy (publication of private facts) is brought by plaintiffs

13

Gudelia Sandoval and Luis Ramos against both defendants. The fifth cause of action for

14

misrepresentation is brought by plaintiffs Alfonso Padron and Elida Padron against defendant

15

Alvarez. The sixth cause of action for intentional interference with prospective economic

16

advantage is brought by plaintiffs Alfonso Padron and Elida Padron against both defendants. The

17

seventh cause of action for negligent interference with prospective economic advantage is

18

brought by plaintiffs Alfonso Padron and Elida Padron against both defendants. The eighth cause

19

of action for First Amendment retaliation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is brought by plaintiffs Gudelia

20

Sandoval and Luis Ramos against defendant Alvarez. The ninth cause of action for violation of

21

procedural due process rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is brought by plaintiff Gudelia Sandoval

22

against defendant Alvarez. The tenth cause of action under the Bane Act is brought by all

23

plaintiffs against both defendants.

24
25

1. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in a claim for intentional infliction of
emotional distress.

26

2. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in a claim for defamation.

27

3. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in a claim for invasion of

28

privacy/false light.
3

1
2

4. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in a claim for invasion of privacy
(publication of private facts).

3

5. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in a claim for misrepresentation.

4

6. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in a claim for intentional interference

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

with prospective economic advantage.
7. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in a claim for negligent interference
with prospective economic advantage.
8. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in a First Amendment claim alleging
unlawful retaliation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
9. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in a Fourteenth Amendment
procedural due process claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
10. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in a claim under the Bane Act,
California Civil Code § 52.1.
11. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense for
comparative fault.
12. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense for failure to
mitigate damages.
13. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense for

19

apportionment of damages and/or fault pursuant to California Civil Code § 1431.2.

20

14. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense asserting

21
22

privileges set forth in California Civil Code § 47(a)–(e).
15. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense asserting

23

immunity under California Government Code §§ 815(b), 815.2(b), 815.3, 818, 818.2,

24

818.8, 820(b), 820.4, 820.6, 820.8, 820.9, 821, 821.6, or 822.2.16.

25
26
27
28

16. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense for unclean
hands.
17. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense based on the
exclusive workers’ compensation remedy.
4

1

18. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense asserting

2

privilege and immunity based on the discharge of a duty by a public entity and a public

3

employee.

4

19. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense for truth.

5

20. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense based on the

6

doctrine of after acquired evidence.

7

21. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense asserting a

8

privilege to publish statements without malice pursuant to the First Amendment of the

9

United States Constitution.

10

22. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense for estoppel.

11

23. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense that each

12

cause of action fails to state a claim.

13

24. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense asserting

14

that defendants did not discriminate against plaintiffs and plaintiffs’ engagement in

15

protected activities was not a substantial or motivating factor in defendants’ actions.

16

25. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense asserting

17

that defendant Parlier Unified School District cannot be held liable for interference with

18

contracts or economic relationships to which it is a party.

19

26. The elements of, standards for, and burden of proof in an affirmative defense asserting

20

that any acts of defendants affecting the terms and/or conditions of plaintiffs’ employment

21

was done in good faith and motivated by legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons.

22

Trial briefs addressing the points of law implicated by these remaining claims shall be

23

filed with this court no later than 7 days before trial in accordance with Local Rule 285.1

24
Pursuant to defendants’ objections to the court’s tentative pretrial order (Doc. No. 215), the
court incorporates into this final pretrial order various purported “affirmative defenses” that
defendants contend “remain asserted in this matter.” Plaintiffs do not object to their inclusion.
The court, however, instructs defendants to address each of the purported affirmative defenses in
their trial brief, as the court is not yet persuaded most of these contentions raised by defendants in
their objections are truly affirmative defenses at all. Defendants’ failure to address a purported
affirmative defense in their trial brief shall constitute a waiver.
5
1

25
26
27
28

1

ANY CAUSES OF ACTION OR AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES NOT EXPLICITLY

2

ASSERTED IN THE PRETRIAL ORDER UNDER POINTS OF LAW AT THE TIME IT

3

BECOMES FINAL ARE DISMISSED AND DEEMED WAIVED.

4

IX.

5
6

ABANDONED ISSUES
None.

X.

WITNESSES
Plaintiff Gudelia Sandoval’s witnesses shall be those listed in Attachment A; plaintiff

7
8

Luis Ramos’ witnesses shall be those listed in Attachment B; plaintiff Alfonso Padron’s

9

witnesses shall be those listed in Attachment C; and plaintiff Elida Padron’s witnesses shall be

10

those listed in Attachment D. Defendants’ witnesses shall be those listed in Attachment E.

11

Each party may call any witnesses designated by the other.

12

A.

The court does not allow undisclosed witnesses to be called for any purpose,

13

including impeachment or rebuttal, unless they meet the following criteria:

14

(1)

The party offering the witness demonstrates that the witness is for the

15

purpose of rebutting evidence that could not be reasonably anticipated at

16

the pretrial conference, or

17

(2)

18

The witness was discovered after the pretrial conference and the proffering
party makes the showing required in paragraph B, below.

19

B.

Upon the post pretrial discovery of any witness a party wishes to present at trial,

20

the party shall promptly inform the court and opposing parties of the existence of

21

the unlisted witnesses so the court may consider whether the witnesses shall be

22

permitted to testify at trial. The witnesses will not be permitted unless:

23

(1)

24

The witness could not reasonably have been discovered prior to the
discovery cutoff;

25

(2)

26

The court and opposing parties were promptly notified upon discovery of
the witness;

27

/////

28

/////
6

1

(3)

If time permitted, the party proffered the witness for deposition; and

2

(4)

If time did not permit, a reasonable summary of the witness’s testimony

3
4

was provided to opposing parties.
XI.

EXHIBITS, SCHEDULES, AND SUMMARIES
The parties have not agreed upon joint exhibits. Plaintiff Gudelia Sandoval’s exhibits are

5
6

listed in Attachment F; plaintiff Luis Ramos’ exhibits are listed in Attachment G; plaintiff

7

Alfonso Padron’s exhibits are listed in Attachment H; and plaintiff Elida Padron’s exhibits are

8

listed in Attachment I. Defendants’ exhibits are listed in Attachment J. No exhibit shall be

9

marked with or entered into evidence under multiple exhibit numbers, and the parties are hereby

10

directed to meet and confer for the purpose of designating joint exhibits. Plaintiff’s exhibits shall

11

be listed numerically and defendants’ exhibits shall be listed alphabetically. All exhibits must be

12

pre-marked. The parties must prepare three (3) separate exhibit binders for use by the court at

13

trial, with a side tab identifying each exhibit in accordance with the specifications above. Each

14

binder shall have an identification label on the front and spine. The parties must exchange

15

exhibits no later than 28 days before trial. Any objections to exhibits are due no later than 14

16

days before trial. The final exhibits are due the Thursday before trial. In making any

17

objection, the party is to set forth the grounds for the objection. As to each exhibit which is not

18

objected to, it shall be marked and received into evidence and will require no further foundation.

19
20

The court does not allow the use of undisclosed exhibits for any purpose, including
impeachment or rebuttal, unless they meet the following criteria:

21

A.

The court will not admit exhibits other than those identified on the exhibit lists

22

referenced above unless:

23

(1)

The party proffering the exhibit demonstrates that the exhibit is for the

24

purpose of rebutting evidence that could not have been reasonably

25

anticipated, or

26

(2)

27
28

The exhibit was discovered after the issuance of this order and the
proffering party makes the showing required in paragraph B, below.

/////
7

1

B.

Upon the discovery of exhibits after the discovery cutoff, a party shall promptly

2

inform the court and opposing parties of the existence of such exhibits so that the

3

court may consider their admissibility at trial. The exhibits will not be received

4

unless the proffering party demonstrates:

5

(1)

The exhibits could not reasonably have been discovered earlier;

6

(2)

The court and the opposing parties were promptly informed of their

7

existence;

8

(3)

The proffering party forwarded a copy of the exhibits (if physically

9

possible) to the opposing party. If the exhibits may not be copied the

10

proffering party must show that it has made the exhibits reasonably

11

available for inspection by the opposing parties

12

XII.

DISCOVERY DOCUMENTS

13

The parties must lodge the sealed original copy of any deposition transcript to be used at

14

trial with the Clerk of the Court no later than 14 days before trial. The parties reserve the right

15

to offer at trial excerpts of depositions, responses to interrogatories, responses to requests for

16

admission, and initial disclosures.

17

XIII.

18

FURTHER DISCOVERY OR MOTIONS
Defendants intend to move by way of pretrial motion that the claims of Elida Padron and

19

Alfonso Padron should be severed and remanded to state court as they do not have any federal

20

claims remaining and their state law claims should be decided in state court. The court notes that

21

under the scheduling order issued in this case, all law and motion is closed.

22

XIV. STIPULATIONS

23
24

None.
XV.

25

AMENDMENTS/DISMISSALS
None.

26

/////

27

/////

28

/////
8

1

XVI. SETTLEMENT

2

The parties have participated in numerous settlement conferences and mediation. The

3

parties do not believe that a further settlement conference would be productive and the court will

4

not require a further settlement conference among the remaining parties absent a joint

5

communication indicating that all those parties are requesting that one be set.

6

XVII. JOINT STATEMENT OF THE CASE

7

The parties are unable to agree on a joint statement of the case at this time. The court will

8

nonetheless require the parties to submit a joint neutral statement of the case to be read to

9

prospective jurors no later than 7 days before trial.

10

XVIII. SEPARATE TRIAL OF ISSUES

11

Plaintiffs Ramos and Sandoval do not request a separate trial of any issues in this case.

12

The issue of the amount of punitive damages against defendant Alvarez as an individual may be

13

bifurcated it if succeeds at trial.

14

As noted above, in the event that the claims of the Padron plaintiffs are not remanded to

15

state court, defendants will request that the claims of the Padron plaintiffs be severed and tried

16

separately. Defendants also request that the issue of punitive damages be bifurcated for purposes

17

of trial and the court notes that it is its usual practice to bifurcate with respect to the amount of

18

punitive damages to be awarded, if any.

19

XIX. IMPARTIAL EXPERTS/LIMITATION OF EXPERTS

20
21
22
23

None.
XX.

ATTORNEYS’ FEES
Plaintiffs will seek attorneys’ fees and costs if they prevail.

XXI. TRIAL PROTECTIVE ORDER AND REDACTION OF TRIAL EXHIBITS

24

None at this time. Plaintiffs Ramos and Sandoval reserve the right to request a protective

25

order should the need arise. Defendants also reserve the right to request a protective order should

26

the need arise.

27

XXII. MISCELLANEOUS

28

None.
9

1

XXIII. ESTIMATED TIME OF TRIAL/TRIAL DATE

2

Jury trial is set for November 19, 2019, at 1:00 p.m. in Courtroom 5 before the Honorable

3

Dale A. Drozd. The parties anticipate the trial to last three to four weeks. Whenever this case is

4

in fact tried, due to the Eastern District of California’s exceedingly heavy caseload, the court has

5

advised the parties that it is highly unlikely that they will be allowed four weeks to try this case

6

and that the court will consider imposing time limits on each party to ensure that the case is tried

7

efficiently. The parties are otherwise directed to Judge Drozd’s standard procedures available on

8

his webpage on the court’s website.

9

The parties are to call Jami Thorp, courtroom deputy, at [phone], one week prior

10

to trial to ascertain the status of the current trial date.

11

XXIV. PROPOSED JURY VOIR DIRE AND PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS

12
13

The parties shall file any proposed jury voir dire 7 days before trial. Each party will be
limited to fifteen minutes of jury voir dire.

14

The court directs the parties to meet and confer in an attempt to generate a joint set of jury

15

instructions and verdicts. The parties shall file any such joint set of instructions 14 days before

16

trial, identified as “Joint Jury Instructions and Verdicts.” To the extent the parties are unable to

17

agree on all or some instructions and verdicts, their respective proposed instructions are due 14

18

days before trial.

19

The parties shall e-mail a copy of all proposed jury instructions and verdicts, whether

20

agreed or disputed, as a Word document to [e-mail] no later than 14 days

21

before trial; all blanks in form instructions should be completed and all brackets removed.

22

Objections to proposed jury instructions must be filed 7 days before trial; each objection

23

shall identify the challenged instruction and shall provide a concise explanation of the basis for

24

the objection along with citation of authority. When applicable, the objecting party shall submit

25

an alternative proposed instruction on the issue or identify which of his or her own proposed

26

instructions covers the subject.

27

/////

28

/////
10

1
2
3
4
5

XXV. TRIAL BRIEFS
As noted above, trial briefs are due 7 days before trial.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 5, 2019
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
11

ATTACHMENT A: Gudelia Sandoval’s Witness List

1
2
No.
1

Name
Amelia Figueroa

2

Raquel Contreras

3

Ivan Garibay

4

Stephanie Liles

5

Jeffrey Hollis

6

Jose Pizano

7

Juan Sandoval

8

3

Gudelia Sandoval

9

Alfonso Padron

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Subject of Testimony
The witness is the parent of a child
at PUSD. Defendant alleged the
parent’s allegations were the reason
for Plaintiff Sandoval’s demotion.
The teacher under investigation for
alleged contact with the child of
Amelia Figueroa.
Union Representative, the witness
was present at the meeting of Amelia
Figueroa, Raquel Contreras and
Plaintiff Gudelia Sandoval.
PUSD Family Case Manager of
Amilia Figueroa’s child.
Investigator for PUSD and the
alleged incident leading to Plaintiff’s
demotion.
The witness has knowledge of the
events concerning Amilia Figueroa’s
child which led to the meeting
between Ms. Figueroa and Mrs.
Sandoval.
The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, Luis Ramos’ employment;
allegations; and Defendants’
employment policies and practices
related to the allegations.

Estimated Time
2 hours

The witness is a plaintiff in this
action has knowledge of plaintiff, L.
Ramos’ employment; allegations;
and Defendants’ employment
policies and practices related to the
allegations.
The witness is a plaintiff in this
action has knowledge of plaintiff, L.
Ramos’ employment; allegations;
and Defendants’ employment
policies and practices related to the
allegations.

4-5 hours

26
27
28
12

2 hours

2 hours

1 hour
2 hours

1 hour

3 hours

2 hours

1

10

Elida Padron

The witness is a plaintiff in this
action has knowledge of plaintiff, L.
Ramos’ employment; allegations;
and Defendants’ employment
policies and practices related to the
allegations.
The witnesses was a Board Member
in 2013 during the initial alleged
retaliation by Defendant G. Alvarez.

2 hours

11

Melissa Cano

12

Martha Moreno

The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, Luis Ramos’ employment;
allegations; and Defendants’
employment policies and practices
related to the allegations.

1 hours

13

Mary Helen
Villanueva

The witnesses was a Board Member
in 2013 during the initial alleged
retaliation by Defendant G. Alvarez.

2 hours

14

Raul Villanueva

The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, Luis Ramos’ employment;
allegations; and Defendants’
employment policies and practices
related to the allegations.

1 hours

15

Rick Maldonado

The witnesses was a Board Member
in 2013 during the initial alleged
retaliation by Defendant G. Alvarez.

2 hours

16

Gerardo Alvarez

Defendant was present during the
events alleged by Plaintiff. Alvarez
has knowledge of employment
policies and practices related to
Plaintiff’s allegations.

4-5 hours

2
3
4
5
6

3 hours

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
13

1

17

Edward Lucero

The witness is the former Assistant
Superintendent and has knowledge
of employment policies and
practices related to Plaintiff’s
allegations.

18

Jim Yovino

19

Anthony Bridges

20

Blanca Alvarez

2 hours
Former Fresno County
Superintendent. The witness has
knowledge of employment policies
and practices related to Plaintiff’s
allegations through investigation
conducted with CICA
3 hours
CICA Deputy Executive Officer.
The witness has knowledge of
employment policies and practices
related to Plaintiff’s allegations
through investigation conducted with
CICA
Therapist of Amelia Figueroa’s child 2 hours
and sister to Defendant Gerardo
Alvarez

21

Rene Rosas

2
3

3 hours

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Former principal at Benavidez
Elementary. Mr. Rosas was
accused of inappropriately grabbing
a child 2014-2015

2 hours

Total Estimated Time

48 hours

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
14

ATTACHMENT B: Luis Ramos’ Witness List

1
2
No.
1

Name
Frank Barela

Subject of Testimony
The witness was contacted on
October 7, 2014, by Plaintiff
regarding Plaintiff’s computer.

Estimated Time
1 hours

2

Juan Sandoval

The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, Luis Ramos’ employment;
allegations; and Defendants’
employment policies and practices
related to the allegations.

3 hours

3

Gudelia Sandoval

4

Alfonso Padron

Elida Padron

6

Melissa Cano

The witness is a plaintiff in this
action has knowledge of plaintiff, L.
Ramos’ employment; allegations;
and Defendants’ employment
policies and practices related to the
allegations.
The witness is a plaintiff in this
action has knowledge of plaintiff, L.
Ramos’ employment; allegations;
and Defendants’ employment
policies and practices related to the
allegations.
The witness is a plaintiff in this
action has knowledge of plaintiff, L.
Ramos’ employment; allegations;
and Defendants’ employment
policies and practices related to the
allegations.
The witnesses was a Board Member
in 2013 during the initial alleged
retaliation by Defendant G. Alvarez.

4-5 hours

5

7

3

Martha Moreno

The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, Luis Ramos’ employment;
allegations; and Defendants’
employment policies and practices
related to the allegations.

1 hours

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

2 hours

2 hours

3 hours

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
15

1

8

Mary Helen
Villanueva

The witnesses was a Board Member
in 2013 during the initial alleged
retaliation by Defendant G. Alvarez.

2 hours

9

Raul Villanueva

The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, Luis Ramos’ employment;
allegations; and Defendants’
employment policies and practices
related to the allegations.

1 hours

10

Rick Maldonado

The witnesses was a Board Member
in 2013 during the initial alleged
retaliation by Defendant G. Alvarez.

2 hours

11

Gerardo Alvarez

Defendant was present during the
events alleged by Plaintiff. Alvarez
has knowledge of employment
policies and practices related to
Plaintiff’s allegations.

4-5 hours

12

Edward Lucero

The witness is the former Assistant
Superintendent and has knowledge
of employment policies and
practices related to Plaintiff’s
allegations.

3 hours

13

Jim Yovino

14

Anthony Bridges

2 hours
Former Fresno County
Superintendent. The witness has
knowledge of employment policies
and practices related to Plaintiff’s
allegations through investigation
conducted with CICA
3 hours
CICA Deputy Executive Officer.
The witness has knowledge of
employment policies and practices
related to Plaintiff’s allegations
through investigation conducted with
CICA
Total Estimated Time
35 hours

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

16

ATTACHMENT C: Alfonso Padron’s Witness List

1
2
No.
1

Name
Detective Varela

2

3

Subject of Testimony
The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, A Padron’s conversations
concerning the wrongful conduct of
G. Alvarez.
The witness was a Board Member in
2013-14 during the initial and
continued alleged retaliation by
Defendant G. Alvarez.
The witness was a Board Member in
2013-14 during the initial and
continued alleged retaliation by
Defendant G. Alvarez.
The witness has knowledge of
Defendants’ employment policies
and practices related to the
allegations and events.
The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, A Padron’s employment
with YCA and events related to the
allegations.
The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, A Padron’s employment
with YCA and events related to the
allegations.
Defendant was present during the
events alleged by Plaintiff. Alvarez
has knowledge of employment
policies and practices related to
Plaintiff’s allegations.

Estimated Time
1 hour

Melissa Cano

3

Enrique Maldonado

4

Gloria Alvarez
Gomez

5

Israel Lara

6

Edgar Pelayo

7

Gerardo Alvarez

8

Sonia Jasso

The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, A Padron’s employment
and representation of hiring as a
PUSD employee.

1 hour

9

Frank Barela

10

Donnie Andrade

1 hour
The witness has knowledge of G.
Alvarez instructions to disconnect A.
Padron’s email and the flyer found
on L. Ramos computer.
1 hour
The witness has knowledge of the
employment of A. Padron with
Eminence and PUSD.

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

17

2 hours

2-3 hours

2 hours

2-3 hours

1 hour

4 hours

1

11

Ricardo Vasquez

12

Dr. Fernandez

13

Mary Helen
Villanueva

2
3
4
5
6
7

The witness has knowledge of the
employment of A. Padron with
Promesa and PUSD and the actions
of G. Alvarez
The witness has knowledge of A.
Padron’s medical issues during the
pertinent times.
The witness was a Board Member in
2013-14 during the initial and
continued alleged retaliation by
Defendant G. Alvarez.

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
18

2 hours

2 hours

1 hour

ATTACHMENT D: Elida Padron’s Witness List

1
2
No.
1

Name
Juan Sandoval

2

Melissa Cano

3

Rick Maldonado

4

3

Gloria Alvarez
Gomez

5

Praxades Torres

6

Mario Vargas

7

Gerardo Alvarez

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

Subject of Testimony
The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, E Padron’s employment;
allegations; and Defendants’
employment policies and practices
related to the allegations.
The witness was a Board Member in
2013 during the initial alleged
retaliation by Defendant G. Alvarez.
The witness was a Board Member in
2013 during the initial alleged
retaliation by Defendant G. Alvarez.
The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, E Padron’s employment;
allegations; and Defendants’
employment policies and practices
related to the allegations and events.
The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, E Padron’s employment;
allegations; and Defendants’
employment policies and practices
related to the allegations and events
leading to removal of contract.
The witness has knowledge of
plaintiff, E Padron’s employment;
allegations; and Defendants’
employment policies; events and
practices related to the allegations
Defendant was present during the
events alleged by Plaintiff. Alvarez
has knowledge of employment
policies and practices related to
Plaintiff’s allegations.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
19

Estimated Time
3 hours

2 hours

2-3 hours

2 hours

2-3 hours

1 hour

4 hours

ATTACHMENT E: Defendants’ Witness List

1
2

1.

GERARDO ALVAREZ, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

3

2.

EDWARD LUCERO, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

4

3.

Celia Paz, Resouce, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

5

4.

GUDELIA SANDOVAL, plaintiff.

6

5.

LUIS RAMOS, plaintiff, regarding his claims.

7

6.

Stephanie Liles, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

8

7.

ELIDA PADRON, plaintiff.

9

8.

ALFONSO PADRON, plaintiff.

10

9.

Amelia Figueroa. This responding party is prohibited from releasing student

11

addresses and telephone numbers without a court order, pursuant to California

12

Education Code section 49076 and 20 USC 1232g.

13

10.

Eriberto Figueroa. This responding party is prohibited from releasing student

14

addresses and telephone numbers without a court order, pursuant to California

15

Education Code section 49076 and 20 USC 1232g.

16

11.

Juan Figueroa. This responding party is prohibited from releasing student

17

addresses and telephone numbers without a court order, pursuant to California

18

Education Code section 49076 and 20 USC 1232g.

19

12.

Daisy Figueroa. This responding party is prohibited from releasing student

20

addresses and telephone numbers without a court order, pursuant to California

21

Education Code section 49076 and 20 USC 1232g.

22

13.

23
24

Jeffrey Hollis, Oliver, Thomas, Pierce and Patty Investigations, 9493 N. Fort
Washington Road, Suite 102, Fresno, Ca., 93730-0660 [phone].

14.

25

ISRAEL LARA, who may be contacted through his counsel Justin Campagne,
who is of record in this matter.

26

15.

Mary Helen Villanueva, 13330 Cypress, Parlier, Ca., [phone].

27

16.

Enrique Maldonado, 13031 Sunset Ave., Parlier, Ca., [phone].

28

17.

Melissa Cano, 430 Petit St., Parlier Ca., [phone].
20

1

18.

David Torres, 1168 Eva Donna, Parlier Ca., [phone].

2

19.

Fernando Banuelos, 560 H. Street, Parlier Ca., [phone].

3

20.

Jacqueline Escoto, 85335 S. Parlier St., [phone].

4

21.

Edgar Pelayo, 872 Tuolumne St., Parlier, Ca., [phone].

5

22.

Stephanie Moreno, 395 Herring Ave., Parlier Ca., [phone].

6

23.

Jose Reyes, 13563 Cypress, Parlier Ca., [phone].

7

24.

Sebastian Benavidez Jr., P.O. Box 1744, Fresno, Ca., [phone].

8

25.

Gloria Gomez-Alvarez, 139 E. Bellaire, Fresno, Ca., [phone].

9

26.

Benjamin Rosenbaum, 1111 Van Ness Ave., Fresno, CA 559-265-3003.

10

27.

Sarah Garcia, 2001 North Main St., Suite 500, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (559)

11

431-5600.

12

28.

Frank Apecechea, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

13

29.

Wesley Sever, 1310 Stroud Avenue, Kingsburg, Ca., 93631 (559) 897.

14

30.

Praxades Torres, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

15

31.

Raul Alvarez, 1574 S. Lind Ave., Fresno, Ca.

16

32.

Frank Barela, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

17

33.

Miriam Zepeda, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

18

34.

Javier Martinez, 440 Faller Ave., Sanger Ca., [phone].

19

35.

Rosalinda Barboa, 1713 Aspen St., Selma, Ca., [phone].

20

36.

Antonio Aguilar, 15429 E. South St., Parlier Ca., [phone].

21

37.

Katelyn Kelly, 6625 W. Damsen, Visalia, Ca., [phone].

22

38.

Kelly Gazaway, 5034 W. Bullard Ave., Apt. 104, Fresno, Ca., [phone].

23

39.

Emilia Arjon, 216 Meadow Lane, Kingsburg Ca., [phone].

24

40.

Martin Mares, 1020 Redwood St., [phone].

25

41.

Dr. Rene Rosas, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

26

42.

Armanda Ayala, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

27

43.

Rachel Contreras, 2603 17th St., Kingsburg, Ca., [phone].

28

44.

Maria Meneses-Trejo, last known address 2285 Mitchell Ave., Selma, Ca., (661)
21

1
2

618-0631.
45.

3

Henry Rodriguez, last known address 1752 N. Thompson, Reedley, Ca., (559)
638-2496.

4

46.

Fernando Elizondo, last known address 10712 N. Windham Bay Circle, Fresno Ca.

5

47.

Officer R. Jimenez, Parlier City Police Officer Badge No. K058.

6

48.

Sonia Jasso, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

7

49.

Blanca Alvarez, LMFT, 14406 E. Adams, Parlier Ca., [phone].

8

50.

Rick Maldonado, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

9

51.

Raquel Contreras, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

10

52.

Jose Pizano, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

11

53.

Ivan Garibay, who may be contacted through Defendants’ counsel.

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
22

ATTACHMENT F: Gudelia Sandoval’s Exhibit List

1
2
3

EXHIBIT

DESCRIPTION

4

1

Administrative Employment Agreement 2014-2016

5

2

PUSD Certificated Payment Schedule 2016-2017 for Gudelia Sandoval

6

3

PUSD Certificated Payment Schedule 2016-2017 Appendix A-3

4

PUSD Certificated Payment Schedule 2016-2017

7
8

Administration/Coordinator/ Director
9
10

5

PUSD Certificated Management Payment Schedule 2016-2017 for
Gudelia Sandoval

11
12

6

Employee Payroll Earnings Report for Gudelia Sandoval

13

7

PUSD Union Dues and Health Insurance Payments deducted from

14

Gudelia Sandoval.

15
8

CSEA Notice re: Melissa Cano

9

PUSD Special Board Meeting Minutes June 25, 2014

10

California School Information Services (CSIS) Fiscal Crisis &

16
17
18

Management Team, Extraordinary Audit Report May 6, 2016

19
20

11

21

Campaign Flyer “Vote for Experience” Melissa Cano, Mary Villanueva,
Raul Villanueva

22
12

PUSD Evaluation Reports for Gudelia Sandoval

13

PUSD Initial Hire forms for Gudelia Sandoval

14

Fresno Superior Court Request for Civil Harassment Restraining Order,

23
24
25

Case No. 14CECG01838, filed June 30, 2014

26
27

15

Workers Compensation Claim Form (DWC-1), dated November 13, 2014

28
23

1

16

2
3

Gudelia Sandoval’s Response to the Alleged Complaint Investigation
Findings dated February 11, 2015

17

Portions of Deposition Transcript Melissa Cano, dated March 3, 2017

18

Portions of Deposition Transcript Enrique (Rick) Maldonado, dated

4
5

March 3, 2017

6
7

19

Portions of Deposition Transcript Gerardo Alvarez, dated May 26, 2017

8

20

Fresno Superior Court Complaint, Civil Unlimited Case No.

9
10

14CECG03500
21

Statement of Facts Roster of Public Agencies, Filed March 4, 2013

22

Statement of Facts Roster of Public Agencies Filed March 26, 2015

23

CalStrs 06/30/2016 Retirement Report for Gudelia Sandoval

14

24

15

25

Hannah Esqueda, District Answers Complaints About Chavez Elementary,
Vol. 26 No. 51, The Parlier Post (October 2, 2013)
Portions of Deposition Transcript Gudelia Sandoval, dated April 12, 2017

16

26

2013 State Testing PUSD Chavez Elementary

27

PUSD Resolution No. 11-2015/16 Notice of Release/ Reassignment,
dated January 26, 2016.

11
12
13

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

24

ATTACHMENT G: Luis Ramos’ Exhibit List

1
2
3
4

EXHIBIT
1

5
6

DESCRIPTION
Correspondence from Ben Benavidez, Director of the Parent Resource
Center, dated October 13, 2014.

2

7

2014 PUSD Board Election document for Mary Ellen Villanueva, Melissa
Cano, and Raul Villlanueva

8
3

Email from PUSD (Edward Lucero) to PUSD staff, dated October 8, 2014

9
and October 9, 2014

10
11

4

District and Community Union, Inc.

12
13

Memorandum of Understanding by and Between Parlier Unified School

PUSD Board Election document for Rick Maldonado and Jose Reyes

6

Portions of Deposition Transcript Melissa Cano, dated March 3, 2017

7

14

5

Portions of Deposition Transcript Enrique (Rick) Maldonado, dated

15
16
March 3, 2017

17
18

8

Portions of Deposition Transcript Gerardo Alvarez, dated May 26, 2017

19

9

Fresno Superior Court Complaint, Civil Unlimited Case No.

20
21

14CECG03500
10

Statement of Facts Roster of Public Agencies, Filed March 4, 2013

11

Statement of Facts Roster of Public Agencies Filed March 26, 2015

12

CSEA Notice re: Melissa Cano

13

California School Information Services (CSIS) Fiscal Crisis &

22
23
24
25
26

Management Team, Extraordinary Audit Report May 6, 2016

27
28
25

ATTACHMENT H: Alfonso Padron’s Exhibit List

1
2

4

Exh.
No.
1.

5

2.

Insurance Document

3.

Gerardo Alvarez Created MOU

4.

YCA Contract-Castani

5.

Melissa Cano Deposition

6.

Elida Padron Deposition

7.

Alfonso Padron Deposition

8.

Enrique Maldonado Deposition

11

9.

Summary Judgement Motion COURT ORDER

12

10.

Alvarez Fraud Arrest (Media Reports)

13

11.

PUSD Agenda Permission to Perform Duties

14

12.

Gerardo Alvarez Deposition

15

13.

Fresno County Grand Jury Report (2015)

16

14.

Restorative Justice Documents

17

15.

Consultant Wage Report

16.

Dr. Fernandez Deposition

17.

Gerardo Alvarez Superior Court Case

18.

Israel Lara Deposition

19.

A. Padron and Lara Text Messages

20.

A. Padron Employment Document

21.

Reynolds Report Concerning Grand Jury Findings

22.

E. Padron and A. Padron Summer Contract (June 16 – July 31, 2014) –
Approved by G. Alvarez, Superintendent on June 5, 2014
Petition for Investigation to the District Attorney Integrity Unit

3

6
7
8
9
10

18
19

Date

Document
4th Amended Complaint

20
21
22
23
24

23.

25
26
27
28
26

ATTACHMENT I: Elida Padron’s Exhibit List

1
2

4

Exh.
No.
1.

5

2.

E. Padron Contract

3.

Supplemental Contract

4.

E. Padron Deposition

5.

G. Alvarez Deposition

6.

M. Cano Deposition

7.

A. Padron Deposition

8.

E. Maldonado Deposition

11

9.

PUSD Board Agendas

12

10.

Summary Judgment Court Order

13

11.

Alvarez Fraud Arrest Fresno Bee

14

12.

Fresno County Grand Jury Report

15

13.

PUSD Documents E. Padron Employment

16

14.

E. Padron Cancelled Check

17

15.

E. Padron Email to Gloria Gomez

16.

E. Padron and A. Padron Summer Contract (June 16 – July 31, 2014) –
Approved by G. Alvarez, Superintendent on June 5, 2014

3

6
7
8
9
10

18

Date

Document
4th Amended Complaint

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
27

ATTACHMENT J: Defendants’ Exhibit List

1
2
3

Exh.
No.

Date

Document

4

1.

4/19/16

Civil Complaint for Damages in the matter Alfonso Padron v. City of
Parlier, City Council Members Individual and Official Capacity and Israel
Lara City Manager Individual and Official Capacity. Case number 16CV00549LJO SAB

2.

01/25/16 Civil Complaint for Damages in the matter Alfonso Padron v. City of
Parlier, City Council Members, City Employee and City Manager. Case
number 16 CE CG 00211

3.

11/17/15 Civil Complaint for Damages in the matter Alfonso Padron v. Stephanie
Moreno, Edward Lucero, and Edgar Pelayo. Case number 15 CE CG
03521

10

4.

01/01/14 Memorandum of Understanding between Youth Centers of America and
John C. Martinez Elementary, dated January 1, 2014

11

5.

One-page Re-Elect Melissa Cano

12

6.

One-Page Re-Elec Mary Helen Villanueva

13

7.

One-page flyer Constancio T. Flores

8.

One-page flyer Raul Villanueva

9.

One-page flyer Gersan Torres

15

10.

Two page flyer Jose Reyes, Enrique Maldonado

16

11.

10/08/14 Email form Mr. Lucero re do not engage in political activity during work
hours

17

12.

12/09/14 Email form Mr. Lucero re Luis Ramos

18

13.

09/08/16 Six Page Defendant Parlier Unified School District’s Request for
Production of Documents, Set One to Plaintiff Elida Padron

19

14.

10/13/16 Eight page Plaintiff Elida Padron’s Response to Defendant Parlier Unified
School District’s request for Production of Documents, Set One

5
6
7
8
9

14

20

15.

00/00/00 Two page Individual Usage Details for Maria Ramos Espi

21

16.

00/00/00 One page School Board Conflict of Interest and Corruption

22

17.

00/00/00 Employment Agreement for Attendance/ SARB Support Services
Administrative Consultant

23

18.

11/19/14 E-mail dated November 19, 2014, from Gloria Gomez to Elida Padron

24

19.

10/29/14 Letter dated October 29, 2014 Addressed to Gudelia Sandoval

25

20.

01/22/13 Two page Employment Agreement for Attendance/SARB Support
Services Consultant, dated 1/22/13

26

21.

00/00/00 Two page revised consultant proposal 2013-2014 Elida Padron

27

22.

00/00/00 Two page revised consultant proposal 2014-2015

23.

10/01/13 Two page document to Superintendent Gerardo Alvarez dated 10/1/13

28

28

1
2

Exh.
No.

Date

Document
from Elida Padron

3
4
5
6
7

24.

00/00/00 One page revised consultant proposal 2013-2014 Elida Padron

25.

04/03/14 Administrative Employment Agreement 2014-2016

26.

07/01/14 Administrative Employment Agreement 2014-2016 between PUSD and
Gudelia Sandoval

27.

00/00/00 Workers’ compensation claim form Gudelia Sandoval

28.

02/05/15 February 5, 2015 letter to Gudelia Sandoval from Edward Lucero, Deputy
Superintendent, enclosures

8
29.
9

Discovery response form Alfonso Padron contained as Exhibit 5 to
Padron’s deposition.

11

30.

00/00/00 Personnel files of Gudelia Sandoval c/o Parlier Unified School District

31.

10

00/00/00 Personnel files of Elida Padron

32.

00/00/00 Contracts between YOUTH CENTERS OF AMERICA and PARLIER
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

12
33.

Consultant proposal from Elida Padron for 2013-2014, and revisions
thereto

14

34.

Consultant Employment Agreement between ELIDA PADRON and
PARLIER UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.

15

35.

Total Payments Report for Elida Padron

16

36.

Post-Retirement Consultant Agreements and addenda between Ben
Benavidez and PARLIER UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

17

37.

Correspondence from GERARDO ALVAREZ to LUIS RAMOS
regarding disruption of school duties and activities

38.

Workers’ Compensation files regarding the claim of GUDELIA
SANDOVAL and related Worker’s Compensation documents

39.

Email from ALFONSO PADRON to LUIS RAMOS regarding election
posters

40.

Criminal records regarding Juan Sandoval

41.

PUSD Board Policy 1312.1

42.

PUSD Board Policy 1312.3

43.

Minutes of the PARLIER UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of
Trustees from June 1, 2013 to the present

44.

Agendas of the PARLIER UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of
Trustees from June 1, 2013 to the present

26

45.

Recordings or videos, to the extent they exist, of the PARLIER UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Trustees from June 1, 2013 to the present

27

46.

Chavez Elementary School student testing abstract records

28

47.

Chavez Elementary School maintenance records

13

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

29

1
2

Exh.
No.
48.

3

Date

Document
Complaints regarding Chavez Elementary and/or GUDELIA
SANDOVAL

4

49.

10/08/14 E-mail dated 10/8/14 from Edward Lucero to All Staff, teachers, and
principals at PUSD, and Brianna Vaccari

5

50.

00/00/14 One page 1099-MISC Tax Form

6

51.

10/21/16 Plaintiff Alfonso Padron’s Response to Defendant Youth Centers of
America’s Special Interrogatories dated 10/21/16.

7

52.

10/21/16 Plaintiff Alfonso Padron’s Response to Defendant Youth Centers of
America’s Request for Admissions dated 10/21/16.

8

53.

10/29/14 Online Posting from Edward Lucero dated 10/29/14.

9

54.

01/13/15 Letter to Ashley Emerzian from Jeffrey Hollis dated 1/13/15.

10

55.

Personnel file of Juan Sandoval

56.

Personnel file of Raul Villanueva

57.

Personnel file of Martha Moreno

58.

Notice of termination and statement of charges and exhibits thereto in the
matter of Juan Sandoval.

59.

Video of crowd behavior when Juan Sandoval refused to leave district
property.

60.

Complaints regarding Chavez Elementary re Raul Villanueva.

61.

Letter dated November 3, 2004 addressed to Raul Villanueva.

62.

Letter dated July 20, 2015 addressed to Martha Moreno.

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

30