On March 16, 2017 a
Motion,Ex Parte
was filed
involving a dispute between
Lopeteguy, Joseph,
and
Kern High School District,
for 36-CV Wrongful Termination - Civil Unlimited
in the District Court of Kern County.
Preview
Superior Court of California
County of Kern
Bakersfield Department 17
Hearing Date: 06/11/2020 Time: 8:30 AM - 12:00 PM
LOPETEGUY ET AL VS KERN HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL
BCV-17-100576
Honorable: Thomas S. Clark Clerk: Linda K. Hall
Court Reporter: Jacqueline Huff Bailiff: Deputy Sheriff
Interpreter: Language Of:
Court Call
NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON PLEADINGS
Hearing Start Time:8:49 AM
The above entitled cause came on regularly on this date and time with parties and/or counsel appearing as
reflected.
Counsel Jonathan W. Hornberger appeared via court call on behalf of Plaintiff(s) - Joseph Lopeteguy.
Counsel Johnny Rundell and Arnold Anchordoquy appeared via court call on behalf of Defendant(s) - Kern High
School District.
Matter argued by counsel and submitted.
The Court makes the following findings and orders:
Defendant Kern High School Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings as to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint -
Granted.
Defendant Kern High School District Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings as to Plaintiffs Second Amended
Complaint - Granted.
Defendant Kern High School District's two Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings are granted, with leave to
amend. One motion was brought as to Plaintiff Joseph Lopeteguy's First Amended Complaint filed on 08/07/17.
The second motion was brought as to Plaintiffs Gilbert Valdez and Jerald Wyatt's Second Amended Complaint filed
on 08/03/17. Each motion attacks the sixth (unlawful employment practice), seventh (constructive and wrongful
termination and retaliation) and eighth (failure to prevent harassment and retaliation) causes of action in each
pleading. The two pleadings as well as the two motions mirror each other.
Even if the causes of action are based on Civil Code sections 51.7 and 52.1, as argued by Plaintiffs' opposition, they
are nevertheless alleged as FEHA claims. For FEHA claims, it is "plaintiff's burden to plead and prove timely
MINUTES
Page 1 of 2
LOPETEGUY ET AL VS KERN HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL BCV-17-100576
exhaustion of administrative remedies, such as filing a sufficient complaint with [DFEH] and obtaining a right-to-
sue letter." (Kim v. Konad USA Distribution, Inc. (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1336, 1345)
"[I]n the context of the FEHA, exhaustion of the administrative remedy is a jurisdictional prerequisite to resort to
the courts: 'Under California law 'an employee must exhaust the ... administrative remedy' provided by the Fair
Employment and Housing Act, by filing an administrative complaint with the [DFEH]
Accordingly, the two motions for judgment of the pleadings have merit and are granted, with leave to amend.
Plaintiffs are given an opportunity to cure their defective claims. However, the court notes that Plaintiffs'
forthcoming amendment should not merely duplicate their Ralph Act and Bane Act claims already set forth in their
second and fifth causes of action, since duplicative claims are subject to attack.
Plaintiff to file and serve amended pleadings by 07/01/2020.
(See reporter's transcript for full ruling)
Counsel Mr. Rundell to prepare order for signature pursuant to CRC 3.1312. In the meantime, the clerk's minutes
will be the order of the court.
Further notice waived.
FUTURE HEARINGS:
September 08, 2020 10:30 AM Mandatory Settlement Conference
Bakersfield Department 1
Sheriff, Deputy
Friedman - Retired, Gary T.
October 05, 2020 9:00 AM Jury Trial
Clark, Thomas S.
Bakersfield Department 17
Sheriff, Deputy
MINUTES FINALIZED BY: LINDA HALL ON: 6/11/2020
MINUTES
Page 2 of 2
LOPETEGUY ET AL VS KERN HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL BCV-17-100576
Document Filed Date
June 11, 2020
Case Filing Date
March 16, 2017
Category
36-CV Wrongful Termination - Civil Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
Superior Court of California County of Kern Bakersfield Department 17 Hearing Date: 06/11/2020 Time: 8:30 AM - 12:00 PM LOPETEGUY ET AL VS KERN HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL BCV-17-100576 Honorable: Thomas S. Clark Clerk: Linda K. Hall Court Reporter: Jacqueline Huff Bailiff: Deputy Sheriff Interpreter: Language Of: Court Call NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON PLEADINGS Hearing Start Time:8:49 AM The above entitled cause came on regularly on this date and time with parties and/or counsel appearing as reflected. Counsel Jonathan W. Hornberger appeared via court call on behalf of Plaintiff(s) - Joseph Lopeteguy. Counsel Johnny Rundell and Arnold Anchordoquy appeared via court call on behalf of Defendant(s) - Kern High School District. Matter argued by counsel and submitted. The Court makes the following findings and orders: Defendant Kern High School Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings as to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint - Granted. Defendant Kern High School District Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings as to Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint - Granted. Defendant Kern High School District's two Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings are granted, with leave to amend. One motion was brought as to Plaintiff Joseph Lopeteguy's First Amended Complaint filed on 08/07/17. The second motion was brought as to Plaintiffs Gilbert Valdez and Jerald Wyatt's Second Amended Complaint filed on 08/03/17. Each motion attacks the sixth (unlawful employment practice), seventh (constructive and wrongful termination and retaliation) and eighth (failure to prevent harassment and retaliation) causes of action in each pleading. The two pleadings as well as the two motions mirror each other. Even if the causes of action are based on Civil Code sections 51.7 and 52.1, as argued by Plaintiffs' opposition, they are nevertheless alleged as FEHA claims. For FEHA claims, it is "plaintiff's burden to plead and prove timely MINUTES Page 1 of 2 LOPETEGUY ET AL VS KERN HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL BCV-17-100576 exhaustion of administrative remedies, such as filing a sufficient complaint with [DFEH] and obtaining a right-to- sue letter." (Kim v. Konad USA Distribution, Inc. (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1336, 1345) "[I]n the context of the FEHA, exhaustion of the administrative remedy is a jurisdictional prerequisite to resort to the courts: 'Under California law 'an employee must exhaust the ... administrative remedy' provided by the Fair Employment and Housing Act, by filing an administrative complaint with the [DFEH] Accordingly, the two motions for judgment of the pleadings have merit and are granted, with leave to amend. Plaintiffs are given an opportunity to cure their defective claims. However, the court notes that Plaintiffs' forthcoming amendment should not merely duplicate their Ralph Act and Bane Act claims already set forth in their second and fifth causes of action, since duplicative claims are subject to attack. Plaintiff to file and serve amended pleadings by 07/01/2020. (See reporter's transcript for full ruling) Counsel Mr. Rundell to prepare order for signature pursuant to CRC 3.1312. In the meantime, the clerk's minutes will be the order of the court. Further notice waived. FUTURE HEARINGS: September 08, 2020 10:30 AM Mandatory Settlement Conference Bakersfield Department 1 Sheriff, Deputy Friedman - Retired, Gary T. October 05, 2020 9:00 AM Jury Trial Clark, Thomas S. Bakersfield Department 17 Sheriff, Deputy MINUTES FINALIZED BY: LINDA HALL ON: 6/11/2020 MINUTES Page 2 of 2 LOPETEGUY ET AL VS KERN HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL BCV-17-100576