Lloyd

Lloyd v. County of Los Angeles

Bad Law
172 Cal. App. 4th 320·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 380·90 Cal. Rptr. 3d 872·29 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 90
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 19, 2009B200505California3,730 words

Opinion

Opinion

Klein, J.

Plaintiff and appellant Dartheatus Lloyd (Lloyd) appeals a judgment following a grant of summary judgment in favor of his former employer, defendant and respondent County of Los Angeles (the County).

The essential issues presented are whether Lloyd’s action is barred by a failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and if not, whether a triable issue of material fact exists so as to preclude summary judgment.

In the published portion of this opinion, we hold:

Lloyd’s claim he suffered a retaliatory dismissal for whistleblower activity did not constitute a claim of discrimination on the basis of a “non-merit factor” within the meaning of rule 25.01 of the County’s Civil Service Rules (rules). Therefore, Lloyd was not required to exhaust his administrative remedies under the County’s internal rules.

We also hold Lloyd’s causes of action alleging statutory violations of the Labor Code are not barred by his failure to exhaust the administrative remedy afforded by Labor Code section 98.7. There is no requirement that a plaintiff pursue the Labor Code administrative procedure prior to pursuing a statutory cause of action. (Daly v. Exxon Corp. (1997) 55 Cal.App.4th 39, 46 […

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.