February 5, 2001
Honorable Board of Supervisors
383 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration
500 West Temple Street
Los Angeles, California 900l2
Re: Monika Blodgett v. County of Los Angeles
United States District Court Case No. CV 95-6343 DDP
Dear Supervisors:
The Claims Board recommends that:
1. The Board authorize settlement of the above-entitled action in the amount of $434,215.19.
2. The Auditor-Controller be directed to draw a warrant to implement this settlement from the District Attorney.
Enclosed is the settlement request and a summary of the facts of the case.
Also enclosed, for your information, is the Corrective Action Report submitted by the District Attorney's Office.
Return the executed, adopted copy to Frances Lunetta, Suite 648 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration, Extension 4-1754.
Very truly yours,
Barbara N. Uyeda, Chairperson
BNU/fsl Los Angeles County Claims Board
Enclosures
Blodgett.wpd
M E M O R A N D U M
January 29, 2001
TO: THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CLAIMS BOARD
FROM: JOHN COLLINS
Collins, Collins, Muir & Traver, LLP
ROGER H. GRANBO
Principal Deputy County Counsel
General Litigation Division
RE: Monika Blodgett v. County of Los Angeles
United States District Court Case No. CV 95-6343 DDP
DATE OF
INCIDENT: February 22, 1994
AUTHORITY
REQUESTED: $434,215.19
COUNTY
DEPARTMENT: District Attorney
CLAIMS BOARD ACTION:
Approve Disapprove Recommend to Board of
Supervisors for Approval
Chief Administrative Office
BARBARA N. UYEDA
County Counsel
LLOYD W. PELLMAN
Auditor-Controller
MICHAEL L. GALINDO
on , 2001
SUMMARY
This is a recommendation to settle for $434,215.19, the lawsuit brought by Monika Blodgett who claims she was removed from her position as Acting Head Deputy District Attorney in the Torrance branch of the District Attorney’s Office, and later not promoted, in retaliation for holding a press conference at which time she criticized the District Attorney’s Office.
LEGAL PRINCIPLES
It is a violation of both State and Federal law to retaliate against an employee for engaging in a protected activity, such as filing a grievance, filing a lawsuit, or exercising First Amendment Rights.
A public entity is responsible for the wrongful acts of its employees which were done in the course and scope of their employment.
SUMMARY OF FACTS
In January 1993, Monika Blodgett, a Deputy District Attorney Grade IV, was appointed to the position of Acting Head Deputy of the Torrance branch of the District Attorney’s Office. The assignment was an out-of-class appointment since Head Deputy positions are for Grade V Deputies.
Monika Blodgett claims that after she arrived at the Torrance branch, she noticed that felony plea bargains and sentences were much more lenient than in other parts of the County. She met with her staff and Court personnel and explained that these practices would no longer be allowed.
As a result of the more stringent criteria, the number of trials in Torrance increased even though case filings decreased. Monika Blodgett contends that a number of Deputy District Attorneys, defense attorneys, and judges made contact with her superiors to complain about her. She also alleges that other Deputies made derogatory comments about her throughout the office.
On February 17, 1994, Monika Blodgett held a press conference voicing her concerns over sentencing practices by the legal community in the Torrance area. On February 22, 1994, she was suspended with pay for the comments to the press and reassigned to the Santa Monica branch, but not as the Acting Head Deputy. In addition, she contends that her Appraisal of Promotability grade was reduced and she was therefore denied promotion to Grade V.
In a later proceeding, the Civil Service Commission found that she was retaliated against for the exercise of her First Amendment Right to Freedom of Speech. The District Attorney’s Office did not appeal the decision and the Civil Service Commission finding became final and binding in this lawsuit.
DAMAGES
Should this matter proceed to trial, we believe the potential damages would include the following:
Medical/Psychotherapy Expenses $ 25,000
Legal Costs/Administrative Proceedings $ 35,000
Lost Income & Benefits $ 475,000
Emotional Distress $ 200,000
Civil Rights Attorneys Fees $ 500,000
Total $ 1,235,000
The settlement calls for the County to pay $434,215.19 to Monika Blodgett for all claims for damages, costs, and attorneys’ fees. In addition, Monika Blodgett was given a higher score on her Appraisal of Promotability and was promoted to Grade V with retroactive back pay and benefits of $45,784.81.
STATUS OF CASE
The case has been continued pending the approval of this recommended settlement.
Expenses incurred by the County in defense of this matter are attorneys’ fees of $188,624 and $17,836 in costs.
EVALUATION
The finding by the Civil Service Commission that Monika Blodgett was retaliated against for exercising her First Amendment Rights is final and will be binding on the County at trial. If the jury returns a verdict for Monika Blodgett, she would also be entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees which, with the verdict, would exceed the proposed settlement.
We join with our private counsel, Collins, Collins, Muir & Traver, and our third party administrator, Carl Warren & Company, in recommending a settlement of this matter in the sum of $434,215.19. The District Attorney’s Office concurs in the recommendation.
APPROVED:
_______________________
LOUIS V. AGUILAR
Assistant County Counsel
General Litigation Division
Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office
CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT
1. Lawsuit of Monika Blodgett v. County of Los Angeles
United States District Court Case No. CV 95-6343 DDP
2. Incident Date - February 22, 1994
3. Location of Incident - District Attorney Administration Office,
210 W. Temple Street, Room 1800, Los Angeles, California 90012
4. Case Summary
This is a recommendation to settle for $480,000, the lawsuit brought by Monika Blodgett who claims she was removed from her position as Acting Head Deputy District Attorney in the Torrance Branch of the District Attorney's Office, and later not promoted, in retaliation for holding a press conference at which time she criticized the District Attorney's Office.
SUMMARY OF FACTS
In January 1993, Monika Blodgett, a Deputy District Attorney Grade IV, was assigned to the position of Acting Head Deputy of the Torrance Branch of the District Attorney's Office. The assignment was an out-of-class assignment.
Monika Blodgett claims that after she arrived at the Torrance Branch, she noticed that felony plea bargains and sentences were much more lenient than in other parts of the County. She met with her staff and Court personnel and explained that these practices would no longer be allowed.
As a result of the more stringent criteria, the number of trials in Torrance increased even though case filings decreased. Monika Blodgett contends that a number of Deputy District Attorneys, defense attorneys, and judges made contact with her superiors to complain about her. She also alleges that other Deputies made derogatory comments about her throughout the office. Ms. Blodgett was found by her supervisors to be excessively confrontational. After several counseling sessions, Ms. Blodgett was reassigned to regular Deputy District Attorney IV duties at the Santa Monica Branch Office. Ms. Blodgett refused to change her management style. Prior to her transfer, she demanded that her reassignment be rescinded. She threatened "to go to the press" if her transfer was not revoked.
On February 17, 1994, Monika Blodgett held a press conference voicing her concerns over sentencing practices by the legal community in the Torrance area and her transfer. On February 18, 1994, she was suspended with pay for the comments to the press, reassigned to the Santa Monica Branch (but not as the Acting Head Deputy) and had her duties limited to non-supervisory functions. In addition, she contends that her Appraisal of Promotability score was reduced and that she was, therefore, denied promotion to Head Deputy District Attorney.
Ms. Blodgett appealed her reassignment and suspension with pay to the Civil Service Commission. The Civil Service Commission found that her transfer, Appraisal of Promotability and non-promotion were proper and not the result of discrimination nor retaliation. However, the Civil Service Commission found that limiting her duties at her new assignment to non-supervisory functions was the result of retaliation for the exercise of free speech.
The department did not appeal the decision because of the favorable result on the promotion issues and findings of non-discrimination. Since Ms. Blodgett had been suspended with pay, it was believed that there were no damages. The Commission issued no orders.
Ms. Blodgett did not file an appeal in Superior Court but filed a lawsuit directly in Federal District Court, again re-alleging all the issues she raised at the Civil Service Commission.
5. Legal Issues
a. Plaintiff, Ms. Blodgett, alleges that she is a victim of ethnic (German) and gender bias. The Civil Service Commission ruled against her on these issues.
b. Plaintiff also alleges that she was retaliated against for speaking to the press about her transfer and plea bargaining policies of the District Attorney.
It is a violation of both State and Federal law to retaliate against an employee for engaging in a protected activity, such as exercising First Amendment Rights.
A public entity is responsible for the wrongful acts of its employees which were done in the course and scope of their employment.
6. Corrective Action Plan
a. Obtain review and advice from County Counsel concerning all unfavorable rulings of the Civil Service Commission, regardless of whether the decision seems to have minor impact.
b. Attempt to resolve/settle employee lawsuits as soon as practicable if liability is probable. This should avoid the accrual of large attorneys' fees at the conclusion of a case which is settled.
c. The department has for the last five years (since 1995) trained its managers and supervisors concerning free speech rights of public employees.