Posted by admin

Henry v. UCSF

Smith Patten files Reply brief in Appeal involving case wherein a UCSF supervisor hung a noose in the workplace after his African American subordinate blew the whistle regarding illegal conduct of supervisors. An appeal was filed because the District Court found that a jury should not be allowed to decide if UCSF is liable for race harassment and retaliation.

Posted by admin

Veloz v. PG&E

Smith Patten files Reply brief in Appeal involving case wherein PG&E utilized corporate security to follow employee who requested FMLA leave. Smith Patten argues that jurors should not be precluded from reviewing PG&E’s use of corporate security for improper covert operations.