statement of proceedings for the regular...

STATEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS

FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CLAIMS BOARD

HELD IN ROOM 648 OF THE KENNETH HAHN HALL OF ADMINISTRATION,

500 WEST TEMPLE STREET, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012

ON MONDAY, MARCH 6, 2017, AT 9:30 A.M.

Present: Chair John Naimo, Steve Robles, and Roger Granbo

1. Call to Order.

2. Opportunity for members of the public to address the Claims Board on items ofinterest within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Claims Board.

No members of the public addressed the Claims Board.

3. Closed Session —Conference with Legal Counsel —Existing Litigation(Subdivision (a) of Government Code section 54956.9).

a. Daniel Serrano and Wendy Navarette v. County of Los AngelesLos Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 608 212

This lawsuit arises from alleged injuries sustained in a vehicle accidentinvolving an on-duty Sheriff's Deputy.

A~tinn Taken•

The Claims Board approved the settlement of this matter in the amount of$53, 000.

Vote: Ayes: 3 —John Naimo, Steve Robles, and Roger Granbo

See Supporting Document

b. Kelsey Martin and Melinda Brown v. County of Los Angeles, et al.Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 585 470

This lawsuit arises from alleged injuries sustained in a vehicle accidentinvolving an on-duty Sheriff's Deputy.

Action Taken.




HOA.101557640.1

c. Julie and Layazel Dumbrique v. County of Los Angeles, et al.Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 585 174

This lawsuit arises from alleged injuries sustained in a vehicle accidentinvolving a Sheriffs Department utility truck.

Artinn Taken•

The Claims Board approved the settlement of this matter in the amount of$50,000.



d. Teshawn Lathier v. County of Los Angeles, et al.United States District Court Case No. CV 15-9264

This lawsuit concerns allegations of federal civil rights violations, battery,and negligence after Plaintiff was shot by Sheriffs Deputies.

Artinn Taken•




e. Angela Carr v. County of Los Angeles, et al.Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 571 601

This lawsuit alleges Plaintiff's federal civil rights were violated when aSheriff's Sergeant unlawfully seized and search her cell phone during atraffic stop.

Artinn Taken•




HOA.101557640.1 2

f. Rodonna Laffitte, et al. v. County of Los Angeles, et al.Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 526 786

This wrongful death lawsuit concerns allegations of excessive force bySheriffs Deputies during an attempted apprehension.

Actin Taken'

The Claims Board recommended to the Board of Supervisors thesettlement of this matter in the amount of $1,500,000.


See Supporting Documents

g. Complaint of Chychy Ekeochah

This Department of Fair Employment and Housing complaint concernsallegations that an employee of the Department of Children and FamilyServices was subjected to discrimination, harassment based on disability,and retaliation.

Action T~ken~



h. Complaint of Edward Flores


Action Taken:



HOA.101557640.1 3

i. Complaint of Madrona Robertson


Action Taken'



j. Complaint of Jan Williams


Actin Taken



4. Report of actions taken in Closed Session.

The Claims Board reconvened in open session and reported the actions taken in ClosedSession as indicated under Agenda Item No. 3 above.

5. Approval of the minutes of the February 6, 2017, regular meeting of the ClaimsBoard.

Actin TakPn~

The Claims Board approved the minutes.



6. Items not on the posted agenda, to be referred to staff or placed on the agenda foraction at a further meeting of the Board, or matters requiring immediate actionbecause of emergency situation or where the need to take immediate action cameto the attention of the Board subsequent to the posting of the agenda.

No such matters were discussed.

7. Adjournment.

H OA.101557640.1 4-

CASE SUMMARY

INFORMATION ON PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF LITIGATION

CASE NAME Daniel Serrano and Wendy Navarette vs. County ofLos Angeles, et al.

CASE NUMBER BC608212

COURT

DATE FILED

COUNTY DEPARTMENT

PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AMOUNT

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

COUNTY COUNSEL ATTORNEY

NATURE OF CASE

PAID ATTORNEY FEES, TO DATE

PAI D COSTS, TO DATE

HOA.101477782.1

Los Angeles Superior Court

January 26, 2016

Sheriff s Department

$ 53,000

Michael S. Braun, Esq.Law Offices of Michael S. Braun

Bruce W. Cochran, Esq.Principal Deputy County Counsel

This lawsuit arises from a vehicle collision thatoccurred on May 21, 2015, on Whittier Boulevardand McDonnell Avenue, in the city of EastLos Angeles when Plaintiff Daniel Serrano's vehiclecollided with a Sheriff s Deputy vehicle. DanielSerrano and Wendy Navarette claim injuries as aresult of the accident.

Due to the risks and uncertainties of litigation, a fulland final settlement of the case is warranted.

$ 33, 328

$ 6, 029

CASE SUMMARY


CASE NAME Kelsey E. Martin and Melinda S. Brown vs. Countyof Los AngelesCounty, et al.


COURT

DATE FILED

COUNTY DEPARTMENT




NATURE OF CASE


PAID COSTS, TO DATE

HOA.101477648.1


June 17, 2015

Sheriffs Department

$ 35, 000

Mindy S. Bish, Esq.Bish Law

Bruce W. Cochran, Esq.Principal Deputy County Counsel

This lawsuit arises from a vehicle collision thatoccurred on June 29, 2014, on Hollywood Boulevardand La Brea Avenue in the city of Los Angeles,when Plaintiff Kelsey Martin was rear-ended by avehicle driven by a Sheriff s Deputy. Plaintiffs Martinand Brown claim injuries as a result of the accident.

Due to the risks and uncertainties of litigation, a fulland final settlement of the case is warranted

$ 41,440

$ 2,995

CASE SUMMARY


CASE NAME Julie and Layazel Dumbrique vs. County of LosAngeles, et al.


COURT

DATE FILED

COUNTY DEPARTMENT




NATURE OF CASE


PAID COSTS, TO DATE

HOA.101469958.1


June 15, 2015

Sheriffs Department

$ 50,000

Ramin Soofer, Esq.Law Offices of Ramin Soofer

Bruce W. CochranPrincipal Deputy County Counsel

This lawsuit arises from a vehicle collision thatoccurred on November 7, 2014, on Alameda Streetand North Los Angeles Street, in the City of LosAngeles when Plaintiff Julie Dumbrique was rear-ended by a 2014 Ford F-150 truck driven by aSheriffs Department employee. Julie and LayazelDumbrique both claim injuries as a result of theaccident.

Due to the risks and uncertainties of litigation, a fulland final settlement of the case is warranted.

$ 38, 595

$ 9, 369

CASE SUMMARY


CASE NAME

CASE NUMBER

COURT

DATE FILED

COUNTY DEPARTMENT




NATURE OF CASE


PAID COSTS, TO DATE

HOA.101491805.1

Teshawn Lathier v. County of Los Angeles, et al.

CV 15-9264

United States District Court

December 1, 2015

Sheriff's Department

$ 72,500

Dale K. Galipo, EsquireLaw Offices of Dale K. Galipo

Millicent L. RolonPrincipal Deputy County Counsel

This is a recommendation to settle for $72,500,inclusive of attorneys' fees and costs, a lawsuit filedby Teshawn Lathier against the County and aSheriff's Deputy, alleging federal civil rightsviolations, battery, and negligence after he was shotby Deputies.

The Deputies claim their actions were reasonableunder the circumstances.

Due to the risks and uncertainties of litigation, areasonable settlement at this time will avoid furtherlitigation costs. Therefore, a full and final settlementof the case in the amount of $72,500 isrecommended.

$ 141,792

$ 6,775

CASE SUMMARY


CASE NAME

CASE NUMBER

COURT

DATE FILED

COUNTY DEPARTMENT




NATURE OF CASE


PAID COSTS, TO DATE

HOA.101430883.2

Angela Carr v. County of Los Angeles, et al.

BC 571601


February 6, 2015

Sheriffs Department

Randy McMurray, EsquireMcMurray & Henriks, LLP

Edwin LewisPrincipal Deputy County Counsel

This is a recommendation to settle for $90,000,inclusive of attorneys' fees and costs, a federal civilrights lawsuit filed by Angela Carr against theCounty, the Sheriff s Department, and a SheriffsSergeant alleging the Sergeant unlawfully seizedand searched her cell phone during a traffic stop.

Due to the high risks and uncertainties of litigation, areasonable settlement at this time will avoid furtherlitigation costs. Therefore, a full and final settlementof the case in the amount of $90,000 isrecommended.

$ 24,437

$ 1, 577

CASE SUMMARY


CASE NAME

CASE NUMBER

DATE FILED

COUNTY DEPARTMENT




NATURE OF CASE


PAI D COSTS, TO DATE

HOA.101414557.1

Rodonna Laffitte, et al, v. County of Los Angeles, etal.

BC 526786


November 6, 2013

Sheriffs Department

$ 1, 500, 000

Randy H. McMurray &Yana HenriksMcMurray Henriks, LLPandWayne P. HigginsHiggins &Associates

Joseph LangtonPrincipal Deputy County Counsel

This is a recommendation to settle for $1,500,000,the lawsuit filed by ̀Rodonna Laffitte and others,against the County and Sheriff s Deputies allegingthat their civil rights were violated on May 18, 2013.

The Deputies deny the allegations and contend theiractions were reasonable.

Due to the risks and uncertainties of litigation, areasonable settlement at this time will avoid furtherlitigation costs. Therefore, a full and final settlementof the case in the amount of $1,500,000 isrecommended.

$ 222,306

$ 43,646

__... _~_._ --_. ~---.n ____.___ ~_ ..____ .---._.__ _--.~__. ____._,. _.. _.____. __,~ Case Name: Rodonna Laffitte. et al. v. County of Lns Angeles~ et al.

Summary Correct~ue Action Klan

The intent of this form is to assist departments in writing a corrective action plan summary for attachmentto the settlement dacumenks developed far the Board of Superuiears and/or the CQUnty of Los AngelesClaims Board, The summary should be a specific overview of the cEaims/lawsuits' identified coat causesand cc~rrectiue actions {status, time frame, and responsible party). This summary does not replace theCorrective Action Plan form. !f #here is a question related to con~den#iality, please consult County Counsel.

Oate of incidenUevent: May 18, 2013, at approximately 9:00 p.m.

8riefCy provide a description Rodor~na Laffl#e. et al. v. County of Los Anpetesof the incident/event: Summery Corrective Action plan 2t~18-045

On May 't8, 2013, aE approximately 9:04 p.m., iwo uniformed deputysheriffs on patrQi in the Firestana area observed the decedenC riding abicycle eastbound on 80Eh Street without any fights (in violation ofGalifami~ Vehicle Cade section ~1201[d]('t]). The decedent wasobserued wearing a dark, bulky, hcsaded sweatshirt and Iprtg shorts. Thedeputy sheriffs followed the decedent, who turned right into khesouthbound lane of Miramonte Boulevard.

The passenger deputy illuminated the decadent wi#h his spotlight. Thedecedent then rode his bike across the southbound lane, about five to sixyards in front of the pafrol car. The deputy sheriffs cohsidered thedecedent's riding maneuver as an indication of possible intox'ECation(a passible violation of Caiifarnia Vehicle Code, section 2120a[a]}, ..Aftercrossing in front of the patrol car, the decedent continued ridingsouthbound on Miramonte BouRevard in the northbound lane (a violationof CaEifarnis Vet~icte code section 212Q2(a]}.

The deputy sheriffs shouted, "Sheriffs Department, stvpi"out the windflw,but the decedent kept pedaling fast until he turned eastbound into thedriveway of amulti-residence property ~t the location'.

The decedent crashed his bike into a fence then walked away an foottowards the hack of the property, The driver deputy parked the patrol carin tho apron of the driveway, and bath deputy she[iffs exited and followedthe decedent ~p the driveway. Bath deputy sheriffs were unfamiliar withthe decedent and this residence. They did not notify dispatch deca~sethey did not ~elieva khey were initiating a foot pursuit or that the decedentposed any significant risk.

The deputy sheriffs walked up die driveway single-file, calling out,"Sh~ri~fs Department," to announce their presence, and instrucked thedecedent to stop and put his hands on his head. The decedent did notsEop. After they rounded the southeast comer of the house, Eh~ firstdeputy sheriff grabbed the decedent's left arm. The decedent fumedcounter-clockwise and used his right ask ka punch the first deputy sheriffran his chin. The impact of the punch caused the first deputy sheriff tostumble backwards aid became temporarily disoriented. The seconddeputy sheriff responded to the attack by punching the decedent on kheface, but the strike a eared td have no effect an the decedent. Almost

!t w~.s later determined that die decedent lived in one of the four residences at the location.

L7ocumenk version: 4.(} (January 2013} Page 1 of 5

County of Las AngelesSummary Corrective Action Plan

immedrately, the decedent tackled both deputies to the ground and beganfighting.

Within seconds of going to the ground, the deputy sheriffs and thedecedent were surrounded by persons2 who had come out of the house,These persons were yelling for the deputy sheriffs to tet the decedent go,and they used language indicative of having gang affiliations. One of khehouse's occupants kicked the second deputy sheriff in the right side of hisbody. Another house occupant grabbed the decedent and attempted Capull him away from the deputy sheriffs. The second deputy sheriff had tocontinue struggling with the decedent while partially diverting his attentionto keep the house's occupants back. The second deputy sheriff had touse force on three of the house's accupants3 to keep them from pullingthe decedent away and also to keap them back from khe incident.

After approximately ten seconds into fighting on the ground, the firstdeputy sheriff was able to request help via his hand held radio. Becausethe first deputy sheriff was still dazed from being hit and tackled, he givetheir location as, "58 and Miramonte," instead of their actual location of8102 Miramonte. Approximately one and a half minutes into the fight, khefirst deputy sheriff recalled the correct address of their location and usedhis radio a second time to give (heir specific and correct location'.

Approximately three minutes after the decedent tackled the deputysheriffs to the ground and continued to fight with them, the deputy sheriffsstruggled to gain controE of the d~c~dent, without success. The deputysheriffs aista continued to monitor khe hoskile crowd and tied to keep #hemfrom intervening.

During their fight and s#ruggle, the second deputy sheriff felt the decedentgrab his gun. The second deputy sheriff yelled out, "Hey, he's grabbingmy gun, he's grabbing my gun." The first deputy sheriff then used his sapsio strike the decedent several times (8-10} in his rear torso, with someeffect. The second deputy sheriff was able to maintain control of hisfirearm.

The first deputy sheriff applied a handcuff on the decedent's (eft wrist butwas unable to keep control of the decedent because he was violentlymoving and jerking his arms and body.

While the decedent was stomach down an the ground, the first deputysheriff saw the decedent holding a small. revolver in his left hand, whichhe appeared ko have retrieved from his person. The decedent wasmoving the gun up end down near the rear of his awn waistband area.When the first deputy sheriff observed the gun, he yelled out to hispartner, "Gun, gun, he's got a gun! He's gains to shoot!" The seconddeputy sheriff did not see the gun, buE based on the tone of his partner'svoice, he was in fear for his life and/or the life of others. As a result, thesecond deputy sheriff shat the decedent in the back of his head from adistance of about one foot. Alrfjast simultaneously, because he was also

z'1'he occupants of the home who excited dte residence were later determined to be fumiiy and relatives of thedecedent.' The three occupants that the second deputy used foroe against are included as ptainliffs in this case.' Thrauehout the incident, both deputy sheriffs used their ~ortabk radios several times tp request additional units.'Asap is a an impact weApon that cottsists oFa feather "pouch" filled v~~ith lead allot with n rounded (striking} end.

Document ve►~sion: 4.0 (January 2013) Page 2 of 5

County of LQS AngelesSummary Corrective Action P(an

in fear for his life, the life of his partner, and any possible byskanders, thefirst deputy sheriff shot the decedent in the back of h+s thigh.

The decedent became motionless as soon as the shots were fired.Paramedics were surr~moned tQ the location to provide medical care, buEthe decedent was pronounced dead et the scene.

Two handguns were recovered From the decedent's possession. Onehandgun was alive-shit r~vofver firearm, which was found to beunloaded. The second handgun was a replica air pistol8 loaded with steelSBs and no red tip' an the barrel.

Briefly describe the root Gausets) of the ciaimJlawsuit:

A Department root cause in Phis incident was the radir~ transmission broadcasting tha incorrect location.Summoning assisting deputies to the collect location earlier may have potentialCy afforded greaterphysiea! control of the decedent.

Anokher Gtepar#ment root cause in this incident was the absence of a T~ser device carried by eitherdeputy. UtiEizatian of a Taxer may have incapacitated the decedent long enough to enable the deputiesto control h(m before he obtained his handgun.

A non-department root cause in this incident was the deeedenk's failure to comply with the lawful ordersof Los Angeles County deputy sherE€fs. instead of obeying the orders, the decedent assaulted thedeputies and ultimately retrieved a firearm from his person.

Another non-Department root cause in khis incident was the gathering of the hostile crowd. Membersof the crowd kicked one deputy and attempted to pul! the decedent from the deputy sheriffs. Theseac#ions diverted the deputies' attention away from the decedent and inhibited their ability to control him.

2. Brieff~r describe recommended corrective actions:(tnc(ude each wrrecHve eetion, due date, responsitr!e party, and any disciplinary actions (f epproprlale)

The incident was investigated by the Sheriff s Dep~r#ment Homicide Bureau to determine ii any crirttinalmisconduct occurrad.

an QeGember 9, 2013, the Los Angeles Country District Attorney's OfFice concluded the deputy sheriffsacted lawfully, in s~ff-defense and in tho defense of others, when they used deadly farce against thedecedent.

Thin incidant was investigated by representatives of the Sheriff's Department Internal Affairs Bureau todetermMe iF any ~dmir~istrative misconduct occurred before, during, or after this incident. Theinvestigation Jesuits wera presented to an Executive Farce Review Committee (EFRC} for evaluation.Can Noverrtber Za, 2014, the EFRC determined the use of deadly farce and tactics were withinDepartment policy.

6 Replica air pistols are made to look at~d have similar f`unctic~n to an actual manufactured firearm. In this incident,the second handgun the decedent +vns armed with was a gasman, model P 10 "Phanto►~~," air pistol. T'he replictt inthis incident has a meta! barrel, plastic slide, a black colored grip, that shoats 0172 propeEled steel BBs at 480 feetper secund, and looks like an actual F3eretta PXd "Storm," semittutamatic firearm.California Frnai Code section 2Q1 SQ(a) states any person wt~o u(ters, removes ar obliterates any coloration or

markings 1'or xn imitation or replica (rearm is guilty afa misdc►neannr.

Qocument version: 4.0 (January 2013) Rage 3 of 5

County of Los AngelesSummary Corrective Actign Plan

The EF'RC racammendecf the Los Angeles County Sheriff's C~epaRment purchase enough Triers toequip elf patrol personnel assigned to Century Station.

Pursuant to the Executive Farce Review Committee findings, Century Station has purchased enoughTaxers in order for each deputy sheriff patrol unit including sergeants, to be equipped with one dur'sngtheir shift.

Century Station has implemented a recurrent Taser training program to improve device fam"s(iariza#ionand use. The Taxer training incorporates scenario-based situations as weiP as a written examination.

Errtergency radio broadcast procedures have also been implemented utilizing both scenariabasedsituations as well as recurrent review of policies and procedures.

Additional training for all deputy sheriffs assigned to Century Station will be sought at the Tactics andSurvival Unit regarding responses to crifical incidents. Glasses will be scheduled utifiz{ng the DepartmentSEkuation Simulatipn Trailer and the Multiple interactive Leaning Objective platform. Cenkury Skationfield training offices have already attended this training as a group.

Century Station has also been approved as an off-site Arresk &Contra( training facility, fulfilling thecriteria for the Arresk &Control portion of Cantirtued ProfessianaE Training (CPT}. Department-certifiedforce instructors teach blocks of Arrest &Control on a regular basis, with emphasis on conUol of asuspect while on the ground.

Document version: 4,0 (Jenuary 2013} Page 4 of 5

County of Las AngelesSumrn~ry Car~ec#ive AcEian Plan

3. Are the corrective ac6ans addressing Departmen#-wide system issues?

C7 Yes —The corrective actions address Qepartment-wide system issues.

~ Ho —The corrective actions ark only applicable to the 8ffected parties.

_us ran aia~ ~.vu~uy anaris~ s urr~arui~~nc

N~►T1e: {Rick Management Contdlnator) ---- ^ ---~~~~ ~ -

Scott E. Johnson, CaptainRisk Management Bureau

Signature: ~~~ Dste~ ---_

~ M1iame: (Department Head)

Karyn Mannis, ChiefProfessional Standards Division

Signature: Oate:

~ l ~ ~c-t~ ~-~t S

Chief Exec tivo Office Risk M gemQ~~t ins~pector'Generel USE'`ONLY~'~~'`'

Are the corrective actions applicable to other departments within the County'l

D Yes, the corrective actions potentially have County-wide applicability. ,

No, the corrective actions are applicable only to this department k''~'.~,

N~tTtB: (Risk Management inspector Genera!)

Signature: ~~~~__~~

_ la~:~~'y/~

Date:

~j b ~6

Document version: 4.Q (January 2013) ~ Page 5 of 5

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CLAIMS BOARD

MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING

FEBRUARY 6, 2017

Call to Order.

This meeting of the County of Los Angeles Claims Board was called to order at

9:31 a.m. The meeting was held in the Executive Conference Room, 648 Kenneth Hahn

Hall of Administration, Los Angeles, California.

Claims Board Members present at the meeting were: Chair John Naimo, Steve Robles, and

Roger Granbo.

Other persons in attendance at the meeting were: Office of the County Counsel: Jonathan

McCaverty, Kevin Engelien, Richard Kudo, Jessie Lee, Craig Hoetger, Julie Ting, and' Narbeh

Bagdasarian; Sheriff s Department: Chris Perez, Keith Swensson, Kevin Pearcy, and Dominic

Dannan; Department of Public Works: William Winter and Dominic Osmena; Department of

Parks and Recreation: Donald Limbrick; Department of Mental Health: Margo Morales and

Damien Parker; Department of Children and Family Services: Karla Hernandez; Department of

Public Health: Ferdows Rashidian; Department of Health Services: Karen White; and Outside

Counsel: Diana Ratcliff.

2. Opportunity for members of the public to address the Claims Board on items of

interest within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Claims Board.

No members of the public addressed the Claims Board.

3. Closed Session — Conference with Legal Counsel — Existing Litigation

(Subdivision (a) of Government Code section 54956.9)

At 9:33 a.m., the Chairperson adjourned the meeting into Closed Session to discuss the

items listed as 4(a) through 4(h) below.

4. Report of actions taken in Closed Session.

At 11:00 a.m., the Claims Board reconvened in open session and reported the actions

taken in Closed Session as follows:

a. Maria Bermudez, et al. v. County of Los Angeles, et al.

Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 578 447

Yeris Avelar, et al. v. County of Los Angeles, et aL


These wrongful death lawsuits concern allegations of excessive force by

Sheriff's Deputies while responding to a 911 call.

Actin Taken'

The Claims Board recommended to the Board of Supervisors the

settlement of this matter in the amount of $250,000.


HOA.101529613.1

b. Non-Litigated Claim of Luis Kao and Julie Teoh

This claim seeks compensation from the Department of Public Works for

real and personal property damages allegedly caused from a backflow of

sewage due to a sewer mainline blockage.

Action Taken:

The Claims Board approved the settlement of this matter in the amount of

$32,894.08 (includes pre-payment of $11,064.29).


c. Justin S., a minor by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, Margarita

Ramirez v. Countv of Los Angeles, et al.


This dangerous condition lawsuit arises from injuries plaintiff received

from a fall while on the playground at Ruben Salazar Park.

Action Taken:

The Claims Board approved the settlement of this matter in the amount of

$40, 000.


d. Elisa Yanez v. County of Los Angeles


This lawsuit concerns allegations of personal injury by a garage entry

gate at a Department of Mental Health Facility.

Action Taken:


settlement of this matter in the amount of $1,500,000.


e. Sandra Gabriel, et al. v. County of Los Angeles. et al.

United States District Court Case No. 2:15-CV-03118

This lawsuit alleges plaintiffs' civil rights were violated when the

Department of Children and Family Services detained her four minor

children without a warrant.

Action Taken:




HOA.101529613.1 2

Constance Johnson v. County of Los Angeles


This lawsuit alleges that an employee of the Department of Children and

Family Services was subjected to discrimination, harassment based on

age and gender, and retaliation.

Action Taken:




g. Kimberly Nquven v. County of Los Angeles


This lawsuit alleges that an employee of the Department of Public Health

was subjected to retaliation.

Action Taken:




h. Jane Doe v. County of Los Angeles, et al.

Los Angeles Superior Court Cage No. BC 561 292

This lawsuit concerns allegations of medical malpractice and privacy

breach while Plaintiff was a patient of the Emergency Department at

LAC+USC Medical Center.

Action Taken:




5. Approval of the minutes of the January 9, 2017, regular meeting of the Claims

Board.

Action Taken:

The Claims Board approved the minutes.


HOA.101529613.1 3

6. Items not on the posted agenda, to be referred to staff or placed on the agenda for

action at a further meeting of the Board, or matters requiring immediate action

because of emergency situation or where the need to take immediate action came

to the attention of the Board subsequent to the posting of the agenda.

No such matters were discussed.

7. Adjournment.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:02 a.m.

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CLAIMS BOARD

HOA.101529613.1 4