Alford
Alford v. Novak CA4/1
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 17, 2024D083782California3,135 words
Opinion
Opinion
Kelety, J.
I. Background This case arises in the context of a contentious relationship between two (now former) officers of a health care provider known as Toiyabe Indian Health Project (Toiyabe). One of these two officers, Novak, served for several years as Toiyabe’s chief executive officer (CEO). The other, Alford, served as the organization’s chief operations officer (COO)—until Novak terminated his employment, several months after it had begun. Alford sought and was awarded relief in a tribal forum in connection
with the termination of his employment.2 In addition, he filed a superior court complaint, against Novak and Toiyabe’s chief financial officer (CFO), alleging defamation and tortious interference with contract. Novak and the CFO filed a series of three demurrers that resulted in the case being whittled down to a single claim, defamation, being asserted against a single defendant, Novak, in what is now Alford’s operative pleading: the verified second amended complaint (the complaint).
No judgment appears in the record; however, for reasons set forth in our order of April 23, 2024, we construe the order granting summary judgment as incorporating an appealable judgment.