LUCERNE – A former county employee who said she was discriminated against because of an injury that occurred on the job has won a $1.7 million judgment against Lake County in federal court.

 

Sharon Leuzinger, 55, of Lucerne worked for the county for 16 years as a senior correctional officer in the Juvenile Hall.

 

On Monday, following a six-day trial, a jury in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California awarded Leuzinger the $1.7 million settlement after agreeing with her that the county had discriminated against her due to a physical disability.

 

“It was a long haul,” Leuzinger said Tuesday of her suit, which she filed in 2005.

 

In 1998, while supervising a softball game with Juvenile Hall wards, Leuzinger was hit in the wrist by a line drive that left her with a permanent injury, her attorney, Susan Sher of Ukiah, reported.

 

Leuzinger had brief medical leaves in 2002 and 2003 for wrist surgeries, but otherwise “consistently performed her job,” said Sher.

 

A series of unfortunate events that occurred in 2004 led to the lawsuit.

 

In early 2004, Leuzinger said she was told she was to be assigned to a graveyard shift with a part-time staffer who she did not feel was qualified. Leuzinger said she voiced her concerns to Chief Probation Officer Steve Buchholz.

 

Then, on March 16, 2004, she was diagnosed with breast cancer.

 

While she was on medical leave for breast cancer treatment, Leuzinger said she received two letters – one from the county’s insurance company and one from the county notifying her that because of the 1998 wrist injury she would not be able to return to work.

 

“It was the most devastating time I’ve ever experienced in my life,” said Leuzinger.

 

“I loved my work,” said Leuzinger, who stated she was one of the longest-serving employees at Juvenile Hall, and had had good evaluations.

 

Sher explained that the county took the action to prevent Leuzinger from returning to work at Juvenile Hall in any capacity based on medical reports that were interpreted as restricting Leuzinger's ability to perform her full duties.

 

Leuzinger said the county later offered her a lower-paying job in the its code compliance division, but she would have had to go through a probationary period during which time she said she could have been let go without a reason.

 

At that point, she said, she didn’t trust the county, feeling that they didn’t have her best interests at heart. So she decided to take what little retirement she had in lieu of a job that she felt could end abruptly.

 

“It wasn’t really a choice but it was my decision,” she said.

 

Settlement talks hit dead end; suit is filed

 

In 2005, before Leuzinger filed the lawsuit, Sher said the county and Leuzinger hired a professional mediator to settle the case.

 

A tentative settlement was reached that Sher said was for a much lower monetary amount.

 

However, the Board of Supervisors turned the settlement agreement down, Sher said.

 

“We had to no choice,” said Sher. “We had to go to trial.”

 

Leuzinger said she never intended to sue the county. “I just felt they needed to be held accountable for what they did and what they didn’t do.”

 

She said she might not have pursued the lawsuit had it not been for an inheritance from her Great Aunt Em, which made the expensive fight possible.

 

After the case was filed, Sher said Leuzinger and the county again went through mediation, and the county ultimately turned down the proposed settlement again.

 

“We tried to settle this many times without any result,” said Sher.

 

During the six-day trial, Sher said the county alleged that Leuzinger’s physicians imposed restrictions on her ability to forcibly restrain juveniles and lift more than 7 pounds, which meant she could not perform the essential functions of her job.

 

The county also argued that it accommodated Leuzinger by offering her the code compliance officer position, which is said didn’t have the physical demands of her former job but paid nearly as much in salary, said Sher.

 

Sher said at trial two of Leuzinger’s treating orthopedic physicians testified that there was no reason Leuzinger couldn’t continue her work as a correctional officer. In addition, Leuzinger testified that the county made its decision to remove her from her position without consulting either physician.

 

The jury, Sher said, awarded damages for past and future lost wages and benefits as well as for emotional suffering, totaling $1.7 million.

 

The settlement doesn’t cover Sher’s work over the last three years, or the fees for her co-counsel, San Francisco attorney Stephen M. Murphy, who joined the case in June. Sher said she has 10 days to file a petition to ask the court to order the county to pay her fees.

County plans to fight ruling

 

Attorney Mark A. Jones of the Sacramento firm Jones and Dyer represented the county in the suit.

 

“We’ll be filing motions to set aside the verdict and for a new trial on the basis of the insufficiency of the evidence,” Jones said Tuesday.

 

If those motions aren’t granted, Jones said the county plans to file an appeal.

 

The jury specifically found that the county did not violate her family medical leave rights or state leave act rights, didn’t discriminate against her because of her breast cancer or treatment, and that the county didn’t wrongfully terminate her.

 

“They found that she could perform her job and that the county failed to find an accommodation that would assist her in doing her job,” Jones said.

 

Jones said a key issue in the case is whether Leuzinger could perform the essential functions of her senior juvenile correctional officer job because of her wrist injuries and the limitations her doctor placed on her ability to work in 2004. Specifically, Jones said Leuzinger’s wrist injury prevented her from being able to restrain a violent juvenile.

 

Leuzinger, according to Jones, admitted on the stand that she was not able to perform the job functions because of her doctors' restrictions, which is one of the grounds the county is using to ask for the verdict to be set aside.

 

“The verdict was, suffice it to say, quite a surprise,” said Jones.

 

“The county does have every intention of taking whatever steps are available to test the validity of the verdict,” he added.

 

Sher disputed Jones’ assertion about Leuzinger’s admission about limitations. “She did not say she couldn’t do the job because she had been doing it,” Sher said.

 

Jones said post-trial motions will take several months until they’re determined; an appeal could take another year and a half if the case is taken up by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

 

If the verdict stands, the court could order the county to pay attorney’s fees for the appeals process as well, Jones said.

 

Said Sher of seeking to continue fighting the case in court, “My feeling is that it’s foolish and a waste of resources.”

 

She said the county will have to post a bond on the $1.7 million judgment, and interest will accumulate on it during the appeals process. If the county loses the appeals process, she added, it could cost much more.

 

Sher said the case could have been avoided with proper training on how to deal with employee accommodations, and could also have been resolved for a minimum amount of money.

 

Next steps for Leuzinger

 

Leuzinger, who is now cancer free, will turn 56 this Saturday. She said she wants to get her life back together after the stress of the trial before she figures out what to do next with her life.

 

Leuzinger said she’s still in disbelief over the verdict, and hopes the county will treat its employees better as a result of her case.

 

She said she misses her work at Juvenile Hall. Leuzinger said she still runs into young people who she worked with, who thank her for helping them straighten out their lives.

 

Leuzinger said when you give children guidance and discipline, you give them hope.

 

“It was such a rewarding job,” she said, although it was challenging at times as well.

 

Leuzinger said she’s going to take some time off and enjoy time with her five grandchildren, all of whom live within minutes of her Lucerne home. “I really need that right now.”

 

Although she said she doesn’t know what the future holds for her, Leuzinger plans to continue living in Lake County, which has been her home since childhood.

 

“They didn’t scare me off before, they’re not scaring me off now,” she said.

 

E-mail Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

 

{mos_sb_discuss:2}