Holmes

Holmes v. General Dynamics Corp.

Caution
17 Cal. App. 4th 1418·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 852·22 Cal. Rptr. 2d 172·93 Daily Journal DAR 10701·8 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1249
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 18, 1993Docket Nos. D012414, D012839California6,298 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wiener, J.

In October 1984 defendant General Dynamics (GD) terminated plaintiff Randall Holmes, a 13-year management employee. Finding GD fired Holmes in violation of public policy by retaliating against him for disclosing to management the company’s violation of the false statements act ( 18 U.S.C. § 1001 ), a jury determined Holmes was entitled to $106,000 for lost wages and benefits, $200,000 for emotional distress and $500,000 in punitive damages. GD appeals, asserting the evidence was insufficient to support the judgment and instructional error. Holmes cross-appeals, contending the court erred in refusing his request for prejudgment interest pursuant to Civil Code section 3291. We affirm the judgment.

Factual Background

In 1971 GD hired Holmes as a management systems specialist in its electronics division (GDE), which builds and repairs electronic warfare, surveillance and navigation systems, and supplies electronics used by other GD divisions. Holmes thereafter received numerous raises, honors, awards, and promotions. In July 1982 GDE’s comptroller, Claude Stoker, made Holmes GDE’s business management manager, a position of increased responsibility. In this position, Holmes…

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.