Photo: boonchai wedmakawand / Moment / Getty Images
LOS ANGELES (CNS) - A veteran prosecutor for the City Attorney's Office who is suing the city of Los Angeles, alleging his career "has now gone backward" for complaining that the office's criminal branch was non-compliant with state and federal requirements regarding the safekeeping of digital evidence, must arbitrate his claims, defense attorneys argue in new court papers.
Deputy City Attorney David Bozanich's Los Angeles Superior Court lawsuit alleges whistleblower retaliation. In court papers filed Monday with Judge Teresa A. Beaudet, the City Attorney's Office argues that Bozanich invoked the arbitration provisions of a collective bargaining agreement in October 2023 and demanded arbitration on the same claim and events alleged in his lawsuit, but then filed the civil complaint anyway last Aug. 8 while the arbitration hearing was pending.
The City Attorney's Office also is asking that Bozanich's lawsuit be put on hold until arbitration is completed. A hearing on the city's motion to compel arbitration is scheduled May 28.
Bozanich was hired in 2002 and has been assigned to the criminal branch ever since. The suit states that his career was on an upward track for 21 years, adding that he worked as a prosecuting attorney and later was instrumental in the establishment of a new unit in 2017 that established policies and practices for employees accessing, maintaining and using technology, including police body-worn camera evidence.
But starting in May 2021 and continuing into the next year, Bozanich frequently disclosed to his supervisors verbally and by email that the criminal branch was out of compliance with state and federal requirements pertaining to the storage of digital criminal offender record information, the suit alleges.
Bozanich believed the alleged irregularities were violations of the state Code of Regulations and state Government Code, plus other applicable federal, state and local statutes, rules and regulations.
In July 2023, Bozanich was transferred to a position in the Pacific office as a "line deputy" in alleged retaliation for speaking out, the suit alleges. He now works on individual cases, but does not make policy recommendations, create or revise protocols or conduct training for other attorneys or support staff, the suit states.
"After 20 years of steady, upward mobility in the City Attorney's Office ... plaintiff's career has now gone backwards," according to the suit, which further states that his current assignment is more similar to what he did the first 10 years as a deputy city attorney.
For the rest of Bozanich's career, his job transfer will give others the impression he was demoted for doing something wrong, the suit states.
"In short, plaintiff's career has been derailed and will never recover," according to the suit.
