Reluctant to Push June Trial Date, Judge in Tesla Worker Discrimination Case Faces Reality of Potential COVID-19 Delay
"I'm looking at my trial calendar, and it's just on to smithereens," said U.S. District Judge William Orrick III, who is overseeing a case brought on behalf of employees who claim the auto company fostered a racist factory environment at its Fremont, California production facility.
May 11, 2020 at 06:28 PM
4 minute read
The San Francisco federal judge overseeing a case brought on behalf of Tesla Inc. factory workers who accuse the company of harboring a "Jim Crow era" work environment on the floor of its Fremont production plant all but conceded that there was no possibility of the case going to trial as scheduled in June.
U.S. District Judge William Orrick III of the Northern District of California, however, stopped short of vacating the June 8 trial date in the case during a hearing Monday morning, saying that he wanted to keep the trial on his calendar in the "one-tenth of 1%" chance that it might move forward as planned.
"I'm looking at my trial calendar, and it's just on to smithereens," said Orrick, who, like judges across the country, is facing an increasing backlog of cases that were prepared to go to trial while shelter-in-place orders were put into effect. Orrick said that he would inform the parties by the end of the week if they should prepare for a later Sept. 28 trial date. By the end of the hearing, the judge all but conceded that a June trial was unfeasible, and he was urging the lawyers to prepare for a trial that would look very different from the way things were before the COVID-19 pandemic.
Plant workers Demetric Diaz, Owen Diaz and Lamar Patterson sued Tesla and staffing agencies in December 2018 claiming that racial slurs and racist graffiti were a regular part of their workplace. California Civil Rights Law Group's Larry Organ, who represents the plaintiffs, said that he hoped that whenever trial resumes that his clients wouldn't have to wear masks in front of jurors.
Orrick, however, hesitated at that suggestion. "I think there's going to be a lot that's different," Orrick said. "We'll just have to wait and see how that all plays out."
Orrick told the lawyers to prepare for a more complex jury selection that might require more prescreening of jurors than typical. He also said that trial staging might be different, with lawyers questioning witnesses from their respective tables rather than from a podium.
"How exactly things get staged, I think will be part of the brave new world," Orrick said.
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton's Tracey Kennedy, representing Tesla, said that she and her team were "still holding out hope" that there would be a way to move forward. "That hope is fleeting," she added.
Orrick added that he would be willing to follow the will of the parties if they determined there was no way to safely move forward and he urged them to continue their settlement talks before U.S. District Magistrate Judge Robert Illman of the Northern District of California.
"If we're going to go on June 8 and you say we can't possibly get people there because of this pandemic emergency, that will be one occasion where I will defer to you because we're not going to put anybody at risk," Orrick said. "That's just not how we're going to go about things."
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllEPA grants California authority to ban sales of new gas cars by 2035. Action faces reversal by Trump
Auto Dealer Software Upstart Accuses Entrenched Competitor of 'Attempted Monopolization'
4 minute readElon Musk Has a Lot More Than a 'Tornetta' Appeal to Resolve in Del. Court
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250