Santa Ana Wins After Judge Vacates $2.9 Million Jury Award

In a stunning reversal of fortune, an Orange County Superior Court judge handed the City of Santa Ana a significant legal victory by overturning a plaintiff’s $2.9 million jury award.

Ramirez v. City of Santa Ana was originally filed four years ago and stems from allegations of workplace retaliation by Rita Ramirez who claims she was pressured to align with one of two ‘competing cliques’ within the Santa Ana Police Department.

“We are pleased with the outcome and remain fully prepared to defend the City’s interests in any further proceedings, including the additional matters still pending,” Santa Ana city attorney Sonia Carvalho of Best Best & Krieger LLP said.

In his ruling that overturned the jury award, Judge Nathan Vu wrote that as an initial matter, there was no evidence that there were any gangs at the police department.

Download the JNOV (Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict) HERE.

“The term came up only a handful of times during this lengthy trial,” Vu said in his minute order (download minute order here).

While Ramirez did not allege sexual harassment or gender discrimination, attorneys did argue that her decision to refuse to join a camp led Chief David Valentin and his command staff to ostracize and shun her and then eventually take responsibilities away.

Vu’s opinion in his minute order was that membership or nonmembership in a camp is not a legally-protected class and the formation of camps is not an illegal activity.

Ramirez alleged FEHA retaliation, failure to prevent retaliation, and violations of Labor Code section 1102.5.

But, according to the court’s opinion, she did not present sufficient evidence to support her claims of retaliation while working at the police department.

Counsel for Ramirez disagrees.

The Court’s Post-Trial Ruling Ignored Voluminous Evidence…

“It was a six-week trial,” San Juan Capistrano attorney John L. Barber of Elite Trial Group said. “The record, which contains substantial evidence in favor of Plaintiff, is thousands of pages long.”

Barber also said that he is surprised by the determination.

“The Court’s post-trial ruling ignored voluminous evidence in support of the verdict,” he told OrangeCountyLawyers.com.

Vu’s ruling allows the City to recover certain fees and costs. Barber, though, said an appeal is likely.

Ramirez’s appeal brief would be filed in the Fourth District Court of Appeal.

“While emphasis on certain issues may vary, the arguments are the same,” Barber said.

During the trial, the City of Santa Ana legal team accused plaintiff’s counsel of misconduct, which included allegedly coaching Ramirez when she was testifying on the stand based on one juror’s speculation and citations to non-existent cases due to the alleged use of artificial intelligence.

Vu’s ruling recommends sanctions.

Additional Content:

• Employment lawyer Orange County
• Yamaha leaving California
• Parents sue OpenAI for teen suicide

“The citations were made in briefing to the court and were never presented to the jury,” Vu wrote. “Further, as the court stated at the time, it did not rely on the false citations in making its ruling. This is because, while the citations were incorrect, the proposition that the citations were intended to support was correct. Accordingly, as the court advised previously, this argument is best addressed in a motion for sanctions rather than a motion for new trial.”

Additional matters still pending include the plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees if the 4th Court of Appeals reverses Judge Vu’s decision.

“Should the judgment notwithstanding the verdict be reversed, our Motion for Attorneys’ Fees will be ruled upon,” Barber added.