Joung H. Yim

Police Officer v. City (2024) – A police officer was terminated for dishonesty and misusing CLETS to obtain confidential information for personal reasons. The police officer appealed his termination but the City Council upheld the decision.  The officer then filed a Petition for Writ of Mandate, but the superior court found the City Council acted within its discretion to terminate the officer because his lie and misuse of confidential information harmed the Department and placed its access to CLETS at risk.

Police Officer v. City (2022) – Convinced a hearing officer to uphold a police officer’s termination for failing to take police reports and “below standards” performance evaluations on basic skills.  The Hearing Officer agreed the officer’s testimony was not credible and that he lacked the integrity to perform his job.

Classified Employee v. School District (2017) – School District suspended and demoted a warehouse worker for multiple violations of safety protocol.  This included failing to safely operate warehouse equipment and for continually neglecting daily tasks. He also exhibited a pattern of dishonesty regarding his safety practices.  Following his demotion to a different position, he again violated safety standards and the School District terminated him.  The employee appealed.  Following a three-day hearing, a hearing officer upheld the termination.  The hearing officer found that although the employee served for many years without discipline, termination was appropriate because his conduct following administration of proper progressive discipline did not result in correction of the misconduct.

Police Officer v. City (2016) – Following a two-day hearing, a Personnel Appeals Board upheld the termination of a Police Officer for dishonesty and failing to properly investigate and report domestic violence. The Police Officer responded to a call for a battery and arrived on the scene to find evidence of domestic violence. The Officer, however, failed to follow Department policies and procedures and adequately investigate the domestic violence. At the hearing, the Officer admitted his investigation was deficient and he could have done a better job. Even more troubling, however, is that when the Officer was investigated for failing to properly investigate the domestic violence, he provided misleading and dishonest statements. While the Officer stated he did not notice visible signs of domestic violence on the night of the incident, the body camera video plainly shows that he noticed an injury on the victim that night. The Board upheld his termination for dishonesty.

Police Officer v. City (2016) – Following a three-day hearing, a hearing officer upheld the demotion of a Police Lieutenant to Police Officer for, among other things, conduct unbecoming: inappropriate instant message communications between the Lieutenant and a subordinate employee.

Employee v. City (2016) – Deputy Fire Marshal dismissed his administrative appeal following termination for unprofessional conduct and dishonesty.

Police Officer v. City (2015) – Following a seven-day hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), the ALJ upheld the termination of the police officer who was terminated for conduct unbecoming, dishonesty and poor driving.

Firefighter v. City (2014) – Firefighter dismissed his appeal following suspension and pay decrease for conduct unbecoming and for bullying co-workers.

Police Officer v. City (2014) – Hearing officer upheld the termination of a police officer for dishonesty, violation of a misdemeanor statute and insubordination. This was the City’s first evidentiary appeal hearing involving a sworn police officer.

Police Officer v. City (2014) – Appellant police officer dismissed the appeal after two days of hearing and accepted original suspension proposed for neglect of duties.

Police Officer v. City (2014) – Hearing officer upheld the suspension of a police officer for off-duty misconduct and found a violation for conduct unbecoming and violating a misdemeanor statute.

Public Safety Officer v. Community College District (2013) – Hearing officer upheld the termination of a public safety officer following a three-day appeal hearing for conduct unbecoming and dishonesty during the administrative investigation.

Firefighter v. City (2024) – A firefighter sued his city employer for whistleblower retaliation and age discrimination.  He alleged that some of his unpaid and voluntary activities for the fire department changed after he reported that fire department management was involved in a scheme to obtain emergency federal funds.  Jennifer Rosner, Joung Yim and Marek Pienkos convinced the California Court of Appeal to uphold the city’s successful motion for summary judgment on the grounds that the firefighter failed to show how the change in his extracurricular activities affected his official position and duties.

Applicant v. City (2023) – A job applicant who was not selected for a position sued a city for discrimination under state and federal law.  The U.S. District Court dismissed the applicant’s lawsuit on the city’s motion for summary judgment on the grounds that the applicant failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he was qualified for the position, or whether the legitimate and nondiscriminatory reasons the city gave for failing to hire him were pretextual. The applicant appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed the District Court’s ruling.

Malkenhorst, Sr. v. City of Vernon (2016) – The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s judgment of dismissal sustaining the City’s demurrer without leave to amend. Appellant brought multiple causes of action against the City for breach of contract because his pension was reduced. The Court held that Appellant was required to first exhaust his administrative remedies with the retirement system.

Bruce Malkenhorst v. City of Vernon (2014) – City was named a real party in interest and respondent (on appeal) in an action brought by the City’s former Administrator, Bruce Malkenhorst, Sr. who sought injunctive and declaratory relief against CalPERS for reducing his pension benefits. The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the complaint in full because Appellant failed to exhaust his administrative remedies.

Alice Robin v. City of Monrovia (2013) – Appellant Robin sued the City for allegedly retaliating against her, in violation of Title VII, after she filed complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.  At trial, the jury was instructed to consider whether four separate actions by the City – including the offer of a retirement package known as the “Golden Handshake” – were retaliatory acts.  The jury returned a verdict in favor of the City and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed.  Robin appealed on the grounds that the trial court erred by not giving a jury instruction that the settlement agreement offered to her as part of the Golden Handshake did not comply with the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA). The Ninth Circuit rejected this argument, but it did conclude that the district court erred by declining to give an instruction setting forth the OWBPA’s requirements.  Although the Court found the error, it concluded that it was harmless based on the evidence at trial because it is more probable than not that the jury would have reached the same verdict even with the OWBPA instruction.

Candidate v. Transit Agency (2023) – Won a dismissal of a rejected candidate’s claims that the candidate was not hired because of discrimination.

Fire Captain v. City (2023) – The fire captain’s lawsuit alleged that after he reported to the City’s HR that he believed the department’s executive officers had misused funds for the purchase of firefighting gear, he: 1) was demoted from a volunteer position and replaced by a much younger person; and 2) received substandard evaluations. Following a motion for summary judgement that showed the department took no adverse actions against the captain, the court dismissed the case.

Firefighter v. City (2023) – Obtained summary judgment in a claim brought by a firefighter alleging he was retaliated against for making complaints regarding how city funds were used following a federal consent decree.  In the court’s ruling, the court noted that the city was successful in establishing that the firefighter had not sustained an adverse employment action.

Police Officer v. City and Police Department Command Staff (2022) – Jury quickly issued a defense verdict on police officer’s 42 USC section 1983 complaint that he was retaliated against, by not receiving a special assignment, for exercising his free speech rights regarding union activities.  Officer’s Fair Employment and Housing Act discrimination claim had been dismissed on a motion for summary judgment.

Applicant v. City (2022) – Obtained summary judgment in a lawsuit brought by an unsuccessful public works’ applicant who alleged that the city discriminated against him because of his race during the testing process.

Nazir v. City of Torrance (2016) – The court sustained the City and Police Chief’s demurrer to the complaint without leave to amend and held that Government Code section 3305.5 did not apply retroactively to a termination of an officer. Government Code section 3305.5 prohibits public agencies from taking punitive action against a peace officer solely because the officer’s name is on a Brady List.

Perez v. City of West Covina (2015) – The Court enforced the settlement between the parties and entered judgment against a police officer after she tried to back out of an agreement reached in principle at a settlement conference.

Malkenhorst, Sr. v. City of Vernon (2014) – Plaintiff brought multiple causes of action against the City for breach of contract because his pension was reduced. The demurrer was sustained dismissing the complaint against the City with prejudice.

Employee v. City (2014) – Plaintiff accepted the City’s Code of Civil Procedure 998 Offer of Compromise for waiver of costs, resulting in a dismissal of a disability discrimination claim.

Alice Robin v. City of Monrovia (2010) – Plaintiff Robin sued the City based on several claims of retaliation for filing Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charges.  Specifically, Plaintiff claimed that a written reprimand, Golden Handshake offer, and ultimate layoff of her position to half-time constituted retaliation.  The jury disagreed with Plaintiff and ruled in favor of the City.

Defense Verdict For School District On Student Discipline (2010) – School district disciplined a student for cheating.  Parents appealed using internal district procedure and lost at each level.  Then parents sought a writ, which the court denied.

Employee v. City (2015) – The Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) dismissed an unfair practice charge based on a reduction in salary and retaliation.