Villanueva

Villanueva v. City of Colton

Good Law
160 Cal. App. 4th 1188·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 350·73 Cal. Rptr. 3d 343
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 11, 2008E042188California6,673 words

Opinion

Opinion

Miller, J.

INTRODUCTION

Daniel Villanueva was employed by the City of Colton (the City) as a lead operator in its wastewater division. After being demoted to operator II, he sued the City under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12940 et seq.), alleging discriminatory and retaliatory employment practices. The City filed a motion for summary judgment, which was granted, as was its motion for attorney fees. (§ 12965.) On appeal, Villanueva maintains that he produced substantial direct and circumstantial evidence sufficient to withstand summary judgment. Further, he contends that in awarding nearly $40,000 in attorney fees, the court failed to take into account his inability to pay such a sizable sum. We disagree with both contentions and affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Between 1989 and 1996, Villanueva was employed by the City, first in its sanitation division, and later in its street maintenance division. In June 1996, when the City outsourced its refuse operation to a private contractor, Villanueva was laid off. The following month he was rehired by the City on a probationary basis as an operator-in-training in its wastewater division.…

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.