Lujan

Lujan v. Minagar

Bad Law
124 Cal. App. 4th 1040·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 2084·2004 Daily Journal DAR 14621·21 Cal. Rptr. 3d 861·22 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 15
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 9, 2004B170438California3,551 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rubin, J.

State Labor Commissioner Arthur S. Lujan appeals from the judgment dismissing his action against Shala Minagar for retaliatory job termination under the state’s Occupational Safety and Health Act. (Lab. Code, § 6310.) For the reasons set forth below, we reverse and remand with directions to enter a new and different judgment in favor of the Labor Commissioner, including a determination of the amount of damages, if any.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Shala Minagar owns a beauty salon in Malibu. On September 7, 1999, Minagar’s shop was inspected and cited for several minor workplace safety violations under the California Occupational Safety and Health Act. (Lab. Code, § 6300 et seq. (Cal-OSHA).) The inspection came in response to a complaint by Susan Grana, who worked as a facialist at the salon. Minagar fired both Grana and hair stylist Noelle Dianella that same day.

In response, the state Labor Commissioner (the Commissioner) cited Minagar for firing Dianella in retaliation for the Cal-OSHA complaint. (§ 6310.) Minagar’s appeal to the Department of Industrial Relations was rejected and Minagar was ordered to rehire Dianella with backpay. When Minagar refused to comply,…

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.