Nada Shaath vs. Los Angeles Unified School District

Case Background

Nada Shaath filed an employment lawsuit against the Los Angeles Unified School District in the California Superior Court, Los Angeles County. The lawsuit included claims of workplace misconduct, retaliation, and discrimination among others. Judge Theresa M. Traber presided over this case. [Case number: 21STCV22706]

Cause

Nada Shaath had worked for the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) since 2007, first at Bell High School and later at the Division of Instruction’s Multilingual and Multicultural Education Department (MMED) in 2018 as a Specialist. She was Muslim and of Middle Eastern descent, born in Kuwait and part of the Palestinian diaspora. Her job included securing grants to develop an Arabic language program.

Since joining MMED, she faced discrimination based on her religion, national origin, and ethnicity. Hispanic employees received more favorable treatment. Executive Director Lydia Acosta Stephens questioned Shaath’s ethics and dismissed her contributions. Stephens also made demeaning comments, pressured her to take leave, and paid her less than Hispanic specialists with similar or lesser qualifications. Shaath’s supervisor assigned her unrealistic deadlines and denied her overtime pay. A less qualified Hispanic candidate received a promotion over her after hiring requirements were lowered.

Shaath reported workplace misconduct, including the misuse of Title IV funds and unauthorized videotaping of students. After her complaint, Stephens and her supervisor retaliated by pressuring her to accept a forged signature and questioning her credibility and mental health. Despite filing a formal complaint with LAUSD’s Equal Opportunity Section in December 2020, the harassment continued.

In June 2021, she sued LAUSD for discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. She later transferred to another role in Local District Northwest, where retaliation persisted. In 2022, Stephens attempted to reduce her authority over a federal grant program. LAUSD fired her in June 2023, citing reorganization, yet similarly situated employees retained their jobs. Despite applying for multiple positions, she was repeatedly passed over. She ultimately accepted a lower-paying job.

Shaath filed multiple legal claims with the California Civil Rights Department and received right-to-sue letters. She alleged that LAUSD continued to retaliate against her.

Damages

The Plaintiff sought compensation from LAUSD and unnamed defendants for various losses. First, the lawsuit requested reimbursement for all medical expenses, lost income, and other financial setbacks, with amounts to be determined at trial.

Second, the Plaintiff demanded damages for emotional distress and mental suffering caused by the alleged misconduct. Third, the lawsuit asked the court to award attorneys’ fees and cover legal costs as permitted by law.

Finally, the Plaintiff requested any additional relief the court found fair and appropriate.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Nada Shaath
    • Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Alison K. Beanum
  • Defendant(s): Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD)
    • Counsel for Defendant(s): Mary J. Sumell

Claims

The lawsuit outlined several claims against LAUSD. The first claim alleged retaliation after the Plaintiff reported workplace misconduct. The second claim accused the employer of discrimination based on national origin or ancestry, stating that the Plaintiff faced unfair treatment due to their background.

The third claim focused on racial or ethnic discrimination. According to the lawsuit, the employer made decisions that negatively impacted the Plaintiff because of their race. The fourth claim asserted religious discrimination, arguing that the employer treated the Plaintiff unfairly due to their religious beliefs.

The fifth claim described a hostile work environment, alleging that harassment created intolerable working conditions. The sixth claim again alleged retaliation, stating that the employer took adverse actions against the Plaintiff for speaking out about unfair treatment.

Finally, the seventh claim accused the employer of failing to take reasonable steps to prevent discrimination, harassment, and retaliation in the workplace. The lawsuit argued that the employer neglected its responsibility to maintain a fair and inclusive work environment.

Jury Verdict

On September 26, 2024, the jury ruled in favor of the Defendant on the discrimination claim with a 10-2 vote. However, it found in favor of the Plaintiff on the harassment claim, also by a 10-2 vote. On the hostile work environment claim, the jury ruled in favor of the Defendant in a 9-3 decision.

On the retaliation claim, the jury unanimously found that the Plaintiff had complained about unfair treatment based on race or national origin. It also unanimously determined that Defendant had demoted or denied Plaintiff a position in 2023. However, in an 11-1 vote, the jury found that the Plaintiff’s complaint was not a substantial reason for the Defendant’s decision.

Regarding the failure to prevent discrimination, harassment, or retaliation, the jury ruled in favor of the Plaintiff by an 11-1 vote. It also found, by a 10-2 vote, that this failure contributed to harm. The jury unanimously determined that the Plaintiff had disclosed what she believed to be legal violations. Additionally, it ruled that the Defendant’s actions negatively affected her employment.

For damages, the jury awarded the Plaintiff $575,000 for past emotional distress and $1.5 million for future emotional distress. In total, the Plaintiff received a judgment of $2,075,000 in non-economic damages against the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Court Documents:

Available for purchase upon request