Avina v. Valley Pallet, VP CA5
F079103
| Cal. Ct. App. | Jul 27, 2021Background
- Avina worked at Valley Pallet from 2006 and served as general/yard manager from ~2007 until August–October 2014, when owner Craig Grilione assumed most managerial duties and on October 21, 2014 demoted Avina to forklift operator with a pay cut.
- Avina (age 48) suffered a brief right knee sprain in late August/early September 2014; he was placed on short light-duty restrictions and was fully released without restrictions on October 30, 2014.
- Avina sued Valley Pallet and Grilione for age and disability discrimination under FEHA; at a court (bench) trial Avina presented his case first and rested; defendants moved for nonsuit, which the court treated as a motion for judgment under Code Civ. Proc. § 631.8 and granted.
- The trial court found (1) the knee sprain was minor/temporary and not a FEHA "disability," (2) there was no evidence the demotion was motivated by age or the knee injury, and (3) credible evidence showed longstanding job-performance problems and restructuring motivated the demotion.
- Avina appealed, arguing the court improperly weighed evidence on a nonsuit motion and denied him an opportunity to present additional evidence; the Court of Appeal affirmed, applying the § 631.8 standard and substantial-evidence review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nature of motion / standard of review | Court erred by weighing evidence on a "nonsuit" and denying Avina chance to present additional evidence | In a bench trial the motion is properly treated under § 631.8, which authorizes weighing; Avina never requested reopening | Motion properly deemed § 631.8; Avina forfeited reopening; substantial-evidence standard applies |
| Age discrimination prima facie | Demotion was age-based; some duties shifted to owner’s younger son, implying replacement by a younger worker | Most duties were assumed by owner/other supervisors; credible proof of poor performance and restructuring | No prima facie case; insufficient inference of age bias; trial court’s credibility finding for employer supported by substantial evidence |
| Disability discrimination prima facie | Knee sprain was a disability (or perceived disability) and motivated the demotion | Knee sprain was minor/short-lived (not a FEHA disability) and demotion was due to performance | No disability under FEHA; no evidence demotion was because of knee; claim fails |
| Credibility / weighing evidence | Court impermissibly assessed credibility on a nonsuit | Under § 631.8 the bench may weigh credibility and resolve conflicts | Court permissibly weighed evidence and discredited/credited testimony; appellate review is for substantial evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Ford v. Miller Meat Co., 28 Cal.App.4th 1196 (establishes that in a bench trial a post-plaintiff-motion should be treated under § 631.8 rather than a jury-style nonsuit)
- Combs v. Skyriver Communications, Inc., 159 Cal.App.4th 1242 (§ 631.8 authorizes the trial court to weigh evidence and render judgment for moving party)
- Guz v. Bechtel Nat. Inc., 24 Cal.4th 317 (FEHA prima facie and burden-shifting framework)
- Sandell v. Taylor-Listug, Inc., 188 Cal.App.4th 297 (elements for age-discrimination prima facie case)
- Schechner v. KPIX-TV & CBS Broad., Inc., 686 F.3d 1018 (replacement-by-substantially-younger-employee inference)
- People v. Mobil Oil Corp., 143 Cal.App.3d 261 (failure to request reopening waives right to present additional evidence under § 631.8)
- Estate of Pack, 233 Cal.App.2d 74 (contrasts nonsuit rule with § 631.8 weighing authority)
- Higgins v. Higgins, 11 Cal.App.5th 648 (trial court may discredit witnesses when ruling under § 631.8)