Herr

Herr v. Nestlé U.S.A., Inc.

Bad Law
109 Cal. App. 4th 779·135 Cal. Rptr. 2d 477
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 12, 2003B143831California3,893 words

Opinion

Opinion

Klein, J.

Defendant and appellant Nestlé USA, Inc. (Nestlé) appeals a judgment in favor of plaintiff Richard Herr (Herr) following ajuiy trial of an age discrimination suit resulting in a $5,163,600 verdict. Nestlé also seeks review of an order denying its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), and a postjudgment attorney fee award of $1,788,159.

Herr cross-appeals, contending the trial court erred in granting nonsuit on his punitive damages claim.

The issues presented include the sufficiency of the evidence to support the age discrimination claim, whether the trial court should have allowed the punitive damages claim to go to the jury, whether the damages and attorney fee award are excessive, and alleged evidentiary and instructional errors.

We find the verdict is supported by the evidence and perceive no error in any of the trial court’s mlings. Therefore, the judgment and orders are affirmed.

In the published portion of the opinion, we address Nestlé’s contention that the trial court erred in enjoining it pursuant to the unfair competition law (UCL) (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.) from discriminating against employees age 40 and over.

The UCL defines…

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.