221 Cal. App. 4th 1425
Cal. Ct. App.2013Background
- Villacorta, a Filipino employee, was laid off by Cemex in Feb 2008 amid nationwide cost-cutting.
- He later worked for National Cement in Lebec at about $69,300 annually, commuted long distances, and rented lodging far from family, causing economic strain.
- Villacorta sued Cemex for wrongful termination, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and national origin discrimination; he claimed damages including lost wages.
- During closing, Villacorta sought $44,000 in lost wages; the jury awarded $198,000 for past economic loss only, none for other claimed damages.
- Cemex moved for new trial/JNOV arguing the lost-wage award lacked substantial evidence and was excessive; the trial court denied the motions.
- The trial court instructed on mitigation and comparability, and the jury form listed $198,000 as past economic loss with no future or mental distress damages.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the $198,000 lost-wages award supported by substantial evidence? | Villacorta | Cemex | Yes; substantial evidence supports three years’ wages not mitigated by National job |
| Should National wages be used to mitigate damages where the job was inferior? | Villacorta | Cemex | No; location/inferiority of National job prevents mitigation |
| Was the trial court correct to deny JNOV/excessive-damages challenge? | Villacorta | Cemex | Yes; damages supported; no error in denial of JNOV or excessiveness |
| Did attorney argument about eight months’ lost wages affect substantial-evidence review? | Villacorta | Cemex | No; counsel argument not determinative; substantial-evidence standard applied |
Key Cases Cited
- Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 3 Cal.3d 176 (Cal. 1970) (mitigation requires comparable prior and future earnings; inferior job limits mitigation)
- Rabago-Alvarez v. Dart Industries, Inc., 55 Cal.App.3d 91 (Cal. App. Dist. 4th Dist. 1976) (no mitigation against economic damages when new job is inferior)
- California School Employees Assn. v. Personnel Commission, 30 Cal.App.3d 241 (Cal. App. Dist. 1st Dist. 1973) (considering location of available jobs in mitigation)
- DaFonte v. Up-Right, Inc., 2 Cal.4th 593 (Cal. 1992) (non-economic damages vs economic damages delineation)
- Morillion v. Royal Packing Co., 22 Cal.4th 575 (Cal. 2000) (federal law does not control if state law is more beneficial to employees)
- Mize-Kurzman v. Marin Community College Dist., 202 Cal.App.4th 832 (Cal. App.4th Dist. 2012) (mitigation analysis for employment at inferior job)
- Cabral v. Ralphs Grocery Co., 51 Cal.4th 764 (Cal. 2011) (substantial-evidence standard in appellate review)