City of Kerman v. Andres CA5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 21, 2024F086661California2,675 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

K.T. began working for the City part time in 2016 and became a full-time employee in January 2020. When K.T. was 19, she and Antuna began to spend time together outside the Explorer program. Eventually, she asked Antuna if he wanted to have sex. Thereafter, Antuna and K.T. had a continuous sexual relationship from that time until she was 21 when she left the Explorer program. The relationship ended in April 2020, when Antuna’s wife discovered it. Antuna’s wife asked K.T. to come to her home. Antuna’s wife pushed K.T. and threatened her. K.T. later gave birth to a boy and took maternity leave from August 2020 to January 2021. Antuna’s wife wanted a DNA test performed on the child.1 However, K.T. said she did not want Antuna involved in the child’s life. K.T. told Antuna to stay away from her and her son. Antuna nonetheless tried to reach out to K.T. no more than three times. K.T. initially said she did not respond but later said she “would always text him back.” K.T. told one Lieutenant Barcoma about the situation, and thereafter Antuna stopped sending her messages.

1 K.T. later stated that she had a DNA test performed and that Antuna was not the father.

2. The City…

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.