Estrada

Estrada v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
159 Cal. Rptr. 3d 843·218 Cal. App. 4th 143
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 24, 2013B242202California4,638 words

Opinion

Opinion

Klein, J.

Plaintiff and appellant Frank Estrada (Estrada) appeals a judgment following a court trial in an action against the City of Los Angeles (the City) for disability discrimination under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.).

The essential issue presented is whether the trial court properly held that Estrada, formerly a volunteer police reserve officer for the City, was not an employee for purposes of the FEHA.

Although police reserve officers are volunteers who serve gratuitously, the City deems these individuals to be “employees” for the limited purpose of extending them workers’ compensation benefits. Such benefits are not remuneration; rather, they help to make the volunteers whole, in the event they are injured while performing their duties. The City’s policy decision to extend workers’ compensation benefits to these individuals, who voluntarily put themselves in harm’s way on behalf of the community, does not transform the volunteers’ status to that of “employee” for purposes of the FEHA. Accordingly, the trial court properly concluded Estrada was not an employee and therefore could not maintain a cause of action against…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.