Verdicts

Jury OKs City's Demotion of Worker Who Was on Leave

A California jury found that a San Jose city employee was not entitled to compensation for being demoted while on extended leave from her position. In 1994, Karol Sytwu, then 56, was promoted to a chemist position in the city of San Jose's Environmental Services Department. From August to December 2000, Sytwu left to care for her father, who was seriously ill. She chose to take an unpaid leave of absence, rather than use her accumulated paid vacation. While she was away, the city decided to reduce the number of staff chemists, and Sytwu was demoted to lab technician. Sytwu claimed that she was not aware of the potential consequences of taking unpaid leave and that she would have used vacation time if she had been aware that a demotion could have occurred. The defense contended that Sytwu was fully informed and aware of the potential consequences when she elected to take unpaid leave. The jury determined that the plaintiff was fully aware of all of her rights and options and that she voluntarily took her leave as unpaid. Sytwu v. San Jose, No. 1-03-CV008929, Superior Court of Santa Clara County, San Jose, CA , 09-07-2006

Deliberate Deletion Of e-Mails Increases Prison Sentence

A judge's sentence for a defendant convicted of embezzlement, inter alia, was increased by two levels for obstruction of justice ' namely, the defendant's deliberate deletion of e-mail from a workplace-issued laptop. A computer-forensics expert determined that the defendant, a high-ranking official with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), deleted incriminating e-mails and files from his government computer shortly after the agency placed him on administrative leave for suspicion of embezzlement. The defendant filed a motion asking the court to set aside the upward departure from the sentencing guidelines because the e-mails had not been deleted deliberately. He argued that he had deleted the files because department policy required departing employees to return laptops in the same condition in which they were issued. The defendant also argued that his personal America Online login information was deleted only to prevent others from obtaining his personal information. The court found the defendant's arguments 'patently absurd.' There was no doubt that the defendant was 'intentionally seeking to destroy this evidence to interfere with the investigation. By deleting the files ' some of which have not been recovered in usable form or at all ' he impeded the Government's investigation.' The upward departure of two levels in sentencing was affirmed by the court. United States v. Tamez, 2006 WL 2854336 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 5, 2006).

Jury OKs City's Demotion of Worker Who Was on Leave

A California jury found that a San Jose city employee was not entitled to compensation for being demoted while on extended leave from her position. In 1994, Karol Sytwu, then 56, was promoted to a chemist position in the city of San Jose's Environmental Services Department. From August to December 2000, Sytwu left to care for her father, who was seriously ill. She chose to take an unpaid leave of absence, rather than use her accumulated paid vacation. While she was away, the city decided to reduce the number of staff chemists, and Sytwu was demoted to lab technician. Sytwu claimed that she was not aware of the potential consequences of taking unpaid leave and that she would have used vacation time if she had been aware that a demotion could have occurred. The defense contended that Sytwu was fully informed and aware of the potential consequences when she elected to take unpaid leave. The jury determined that the plaintiff was fully aware of all of her rights and options and that she voluntarily took her leave as unpaid. Sytwu v. San Jose, No. 1-03-CV008929, Superior Court of Santa Clara County, San Jose, CA , 09-07-2006

Deliberate Deletion Of e-Mails Increases Prison Sentence

A judge's sentence for a defendant convicted of embezzlement, inter alia, was increased by two levels for obstruction of justice ' namely, the defendant's deliberate deletion of e-mail from a workplace-issued laptop. A computer-forensics expert determined that the defendant, a high-ranking official with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), deleted incriminating e-mails and files from his government computer shortly after the agency placed him on administrative leave for suspicion of embezzlement. The defendant filed a motion asking the court to set aside the upward departure from the sentencing guidelines because the e-mails had not been deleted deliberately. He argued that he had deleted the files because department policy required departing employees to return laptops in the same condition in which they were issued. The defendant also argued that his personal America Online login information was deleted only to prevent others from obtaining his personal information. The court found the defendant's arguments 'patently absurd.' There was no doubt that the defendant was 'intentionally seeking to destroy this evidence to interfere with the investigation. By deleting the files ' some of which have not been recovered in usable form or at all ' he impeded the Government's investigation.' The upward departure of two levels in sentencing was affirmed by the court. United States v. Tamez, 2006 WL 2854336 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 5, 2006).