Walker

Walker v. San Francisco Housing Authority

Bad Law
100 Cal. App. 4th 685·122 Cal. Rptr. 2d 758·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 4442·2002 D.A.R. 8436·2002 Daily Journal DAR 8436
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 26, 2002A095476California2,349 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reardon, J.

In the face of flagrant discovery abuse, the trial court ordered terminating sanctions against appellant S an Francisco Housing Authority (SFHA). After entry of default judgment against it, SFHA submitted an affidavit of attorney fault, moving unsuccessfully to set aside the default judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b) (section 473(b)). On appeal, SFHA assails both the order for terminating sanctions and the denial of its motion to set aside the default judgment. We affirm.

I. Factual Background

A. The Underlying Lawsuit

In September 1998 respondent Thelma Walker filed a complaint against SFHA and Joe Trigueros, a former employee of SFHA. The complaint set forth causes of action for sexual harassment and sex discrimination; defamation; invasion of privacy; interference with prospective economic advantage; negligent hiring, retention and supervision; assault; and trespass to property.

Walker alleged that while employed by SFHA as a journeyman painter, she suffered “severe and/or pervasive” sexual harassment by her foreman, Joe Trigueros. SFHA eventually put Trigueros on administrative leave, but brought him back before concluding…

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.