Theodore Faye v. Los Angeles Unified School District, et al.

Case Background

The plaintiff, Theodore Faye, was a 66-year-old video production teacher at Holmes Middle School in Northridge. On June 15, 2021, he filed a wrongful termination lawsuit against the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). He alleged retaliation, harassment, and discrimination, claiming violations of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and the Labor Code.

LAUSD is a public school district organized under California state law. Its governing board, officers, employees, and staff operated and managed Oliver Wendell Holmes Middle School.

The plaintiff filed the case in the California Superior Court, Los Angeles County. Judges  Daniel M. Crowley and Monica Bachner presided over the case. [Case number: 21STCV22368]

Cause

On December 18, 2019, Theodore Faye, a teacher at Holmes Middle School discovered disturbing caricatures targeting him, created by four eighth-grade boys. These images depicted bloody bullet holes, a hatchet in his head, Nazi symbols, and racist and anti-Semitic slurs.

The teacher immediately reported the drawings to the school administration. Despite expressing urgent safety concerns for himself and his students, he was ignored. The school even planned to return the boys to his class the next day. Assistant Principal Mari Ann Aguilar described the drawings as “unflattering caricatures,” suggesting they were open to interpretation. Principal Hahn Kim D’Alosio also downplayed their significance.

Believing he had experienced a hate crime, the teacher filed a police report with the LAPD, only to be told the LAUSD police should handle the matter.

During the winter break, the teacher became increasingly anxious and could not sleep. He sought therapy, which led to him being off work from January 13 to January 24, 2020. He returned to work on January 27 but felt nervous and scared. On his first day back, his supervisor conducted an unannounced observation, followed by another two days later. When he received a notice about a potential disciplinary meeting, he suffered a panic attack, fearing retaliation for his complaints and medical leave. He went to the emergency room and developed an adjustment disorder with anxiety. His therapist placed him on FMLA/CFRA leave from January 30 to April 29, 2020.

On February 19, 2020, he learned he might receive a below-standard performance evaluation. He requested a supplemental formal observation, which LAUSD agreed to but never conducted. He formally asked for reasonable accommodations for his mental disability via email on February 25. Despite acknowledging his request, the principal and assistant principal failed to hold an interactive meeting. Consequently, his leave was extended to July 29, 2020.

While he was on medical leave, Ponce and D’Alosio met without him and issued a substandard evaluation. His teaching contract was not renewed, and he was denied the supplemental observation he had requested.

Damages

As a direct and foreseeable result of the wrongful actions of LAUSD, the plaintiff suffered significant losses in earnings and employment benefits. He continued to face substantial economic losses.

Additionally, the plaintiff experienced humiliation, emotional distress, and both mental and physical pain due to these wrongful actions. Moreover, the plaintiff incurred attorney fees and legal expenses related to his case.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Theodore Faye
    • Counsel for Plaintiff(s):  Laura L. Horton | Flor C. Dery
  • Defendant(s): Los Angeles Unified School District
    • Counsel for Defendant(s): Elizabeth M. Kessel | Jack M. Schuler | Warren M. Williams

Claims

LAUSD discriminated against the plaintiff due to his disability, extended FMLA/CFRA leave, and complaints about workplace safety. The district failed to engage in the interactive process required by FEHA and did not provide reasonable accommodations for his disability. As a result, the plaintiff faced retaliation under FEHA, CFRA, and Labor Code § 1102.5.

In March 2020, LAUSD transitioned to remote teaching due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Despite this shift, the plaintiff could have returned to work and taught remotely. The failure to accommodate him and the lack of an interactive process further compounded his difficulties.

Defense

The LAUSD argued that the plaintiff was a poor performer, justifying the non-renewal of his contract. They claimed that the Education Code and the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) required the final performance evaluation to occur without the plaintiff. Since he was on medical leave, LAUSD stated he forfeited his chance for a supplemental performance observation.

As a contract employee, the plaintiff was subject to non-renewal without a specified reason. LAUSD asserted that they were unaware of the plaintiff’s disability at the time of the decision. This lack of knowledge played a role in their justification for not renewing his contract.

In their defense, LAUSD maintained that their actions complied with established guidelines. They believed they followed the necessary protocols regarding performance evaluations. However, the plaintiff felt this reasoning overlooked critical factors related to his situation.

The assertion that he was a poor performer remained a point of contention. The plaintiff believed his work had been satisfactory and that he deserved a fair evaluation process. He also felt that the failure to consider his disability further demonstrated a lack of support from the district.

Jury Verdict

On February 20, 2024, the jury delivered a verdict in favor of plaintiff Theodore Faye. They found that the defendants violated the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). The jury concluded that LAUSD failed to provide reasonable accommodations and did not engage in the required interactive process.

Additionally, they determined that the defendants committed retaliation, harassment, and disability discrimination. They also found that LAUSD was liable for retaliation in violation of Labor Code § 6310.

  • Past lost earnings and benefits: $165,281
  • Past loss of enjoyment of life, mental suffering, anxiety, humiliation, grief, inconvenience, physical pain or impairment, and emotional distress: $750,000

The total damages awarded came up to $915,281

On March 20, 2024, the Honorable Daniel M. Crowley passed a judgment consistent with the verdict.

Court Documents:

Available upon request