In the California legal landscape, after the dust of a trial settles, the winning party – or the “prevailing party” – generally has the right to recoup costs from the losing side. For instance, if an employee plaintiff wins a monetary judgment against their employer, they can demand the employer pay certain court-related expenses. Conversely, if the employer gets the case dismissed, they might be eligible to claim costs from the employee.
Things get murkier when cases are settled out of court. In such scenarios, determining the “prevailing party” can be challenging. A notable California case, concerning Maureen deSaulles, throws light on this very conundrum. Keep reading to learn more about this case. Then contact PLBH at (800) 435-7542 if you require a free legal consultation from an employment law attorney.
The Intricacies of the deSaulles Case
Maureen deSaulles, in 2007, took legal action against her ex-employer, Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula, on various counts, including alleged failure to accommodate her medical condition and retaliation. Out of her seven complaints, the court agreed with the hospital on five, allowing only two claims to move forward. Later, the parties settled these two issues for $23,500.
The twist in the tale came when Ms. deSaulles decided to appeal the court’s decision on the five dismissed claims. After her appeal didn’t find favor, the hospital sought costs related to these five claims. They argued that since they had won on these particular complaints, they should be compensated for related costs, which amounted to $12,731.92.
The matter then escalated to the California Court of Appeals. This court held a differing viewpoint: since the hospital paid Ms. deSaulles in the settlement, she was, in fact, the prevailing party. The California Supreme Court, in 2016, supported this viewpoint. The takeaway? If a defendant pays a plaintiff to settle a matter, it counts as a “net monetary recovery” by the latter, making them the prevailing party. Thus, Ms. deSaulles had the right to recover costs, regardless of the fact that she only succeeded on a portion of her original claims.
Key Takeaways from deSaulles
The deSaulles case offers profound insights for plaintiffs navigating the California employment litigation maze:
- Even if plaintiffs don’t win their case in totality, they might still be entitled to recover costs from the defendant, provided they achieve any monetary recovery – either via a settlement or a judgment.
- The protracted timeline of the deSaulles case (2007-2016) underscores the importance of having competent legal counsel to draft watertight settlement agreements. Such an agreement should clearly articulate cost-related terms to prevent any future disputes.
- The case also emphasizes the importance of having seasoned attorneys proficient in both employment law and the appeals process. Appeals can be complex, necessitating expertise to ensure the best possible outcomes.
Seeking Legal Counsel?
Should you find yourself grappling with employment litigation, consider reaching out to experienced professionals. At PLBH, our legal team boasts extensive expertise in both employment law and appeals, ensuring you’re supported at every step of the litigation process. Contact us today at (800) 435-7542 to understand how we can best serve your needs in employment-related cases.