Francisco Jimenez, an individual vs. So. Cal Garment Works, LLC, a limited liability company

Case Background

On July 13, 2021, Plaintiff Francisco Jimenez filed a wrongful termination against his employer So.Cal Garment Works, LLC. His complaint contained allegations of several adverse employment actions, including unlawful harassment and discrimination. The case was filed in the California Superior Court, Los Angeles County. Judge Richard L. Fruin presided over this case. [Case number: 23STCV16347]

Cause

In November 2018, Defendant So.Cal Garment Works, LLC (“Employers” or “Defendant”) hired Francisco Jimenez (“Plaintiff”) as a warehouse manager. He worked full-time and met all job requirements satisfactorily until his wrongful termination around April 21, 2023.

On April 30, 2021, Plaintiff sustained a serious back injury while driving for Employers. Consequently, he received modified/light duty assignments and work restrictions, including a limit of 25 pounds for lifting. This injury significantly affected his ability to work, qualifying as a disability. However, Employers ignored these restrictions and compelled him to fulfill his duties without necessary accommodations.

On May 19, 2021, Plaintiff suffered another injury while driving for Employers. Again, he was assigned light duty with restrictions, including no twisting of his back. This injury also impaired his ability to work and constituted a disability. Once more, Employers disregarded these restrictions and forced him to work without accommodations.

Following this, Plaintiff requested that Employers send him to a doctor for his work-related injuries, but they failed to do so. He also sought assistance and accommodations to perform his job duties two to three times a week, but Employers provided no help. On April 14, 2023, Plaintiff made another request for assistance, which Employers denied. Instead, on April 21, 2023, they terminated him, claiming he was a liability.

Damages

Due to Defendants’ actions, Plaintiff suffered significant and ongoing general and special damages. These included severe pain, emotional distress, anxiety, depression, headaches, tension, and other physical issues. Additionally, Plaintiff incurred medical expenses and costs for psychological counseling and treatment, as well as lost wages and benefits both past and future.

Consequently, Plaintiff sought compensation for lost wages, bonuses, commissions, benefits, and a reduction in earning capacity. He claimed general damages for emotional and mental distress that exceeded the jurisdictional minimum of this Court.

Furthermore, the actions against Plaintiff were executed by officers, directors, and managing agents who acted in a deliberate, cold, and cruel manner. They consciously disregarded Plaintiff’s rights with the intent to cause injury and damage. Therefore, Plaintiff requested that the Court impose punitive damages against Defendants individually.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Francisco Jimenez
    • Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Jason Buccat
  • Defendant(s): So.Cal Garment Works, LLC
    • Counsel for Defendant(s): Jason C. Gage

Claims

Plaintiff believed that Employers discriminated, harassed, and retaliated against him. They terminated him based on his real or perceived disability and medical condition. Additionally, they ignored his requests for accommodations and engagement in protected activities. Employers denied him necessary accommodations and an interactive process, leading to his wrongful termination.

These actions violated the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and were a direct cause of the damages Plaintiff suffered

Defense

The Defendants denied liability for the allegations levied against them. They asserted affirmative defenses. The Defendant claimed that Jimenez engaged in wrongful conduct or omissions related to the facts presented in the Complaint. Therefore, they alleged that he should be barred from receiving any legal or equitable relief sought in the Complaint.

Jury Verdict

On August 9, 2024, a twelve-panel jury returned the verdict in favor of the Plaintiff. They found that Defendant SoCal failed to provide reasonable accommodation to Plaintiff and failed to participate in the good faith interactive process. The jury ascertained that the request for reasonable accommodations was a substantial motivating factor for Plaintiff’s termination. Such wrongful termination had caused Plaintiff harm and the jury awarded the following damages to compensate him:

  • Past economic loss, including loss of earnings: $22,000
  • Past non-economic loss: $2,500

The total award came up to $24,500.

On August 23, 2024, Judge Richard L. Fruin passed a judgment consistent with the verdict.

Court Documents:

Available upon request