Fee Recovery Properly Denied, With Lower Court Correctly Construing Jury Special Verdict.
In Letizia v. Wentworth, Paoli & Purdy, LLP, Case No. G050132 (4th Dist. Div. 3 Aug. 17, 2015) (unpublished), cross-complainant obtained a jury verdict in her favor, with the jury making these specific findings: (1) cross-complainant was terminated by cross-defendant as an employee effective October 12, 2011, (2) cross-complainant and cross-defendant entered into a different contract on October 12, 2011, and (3) cross-complainant incurred travel expenses as cross-defendant’s employee or at the direction of cross-defendant. Cross-complainant then moved to recover attorney’s fees under Labor Code section 2802(c), which allows for reimbursement of attorney’s fees for claimants successfully enforcing their rights for indemnification of expenses incurred as a result of employees’ discharge of their duties. The lower court denied any fee recovery to cross-complainant.
That result was sustained on appeal. Because cross-complainant had been terminated as an employee on October 12, 2011, the only reasonable construction of the special verdict was that she became an independent contractor at the direction of cross-defendant, which means no fee entitlement under the employee fee-shifting statute.
Justice Ikola was the author of the 3-0 decision.