Hager

INTRODUCTION

In a whistleblower retaliation lawsuit brought under Labor Code section former 1102.5, subdivision (b) (hereafter section 1102.5(b)), the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of retaliation. The plaintiff must show he engaged in protected activity, his employer subjected him to an adverse employment action, and there is a causal link between the two. If the plaintiff meets his prima facie burden, the defendant has the burden to prove a legitimate, nonretaliatory explanation for its actions. To prevail, the plaintiff has to show that the explanation is a pretext for the retaliation. (Patten v. Grant Joint Union High School Dist. (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 1378, 1384 [ 37 Cal.Rptr.3d 113 ].)

In Hager v. County of Los Angeles (Mar. 25, 2010, B208941) (nonpub. opn.)) (Hager I), we held that plaintiff Darren Hager could pursue his whistleblower retaliation lawsuit against his employers, defendants the County of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (collectively, County). The County appeals from a judgment entered after a substantial jury verdict in Hager’s favor. Hager appeals from the postjudgment order denying his request for attorney…