Adolfo Gonzales, then the Los Angeles County probation department chief, sued the county in 2021 for wrongful termination and retaliation for reporting to the L.A. Board of Supervisors and state regulators that staffing shortages and resulting operational faults at juvenile halls were responsible for violations of state regulations.
The case received wide media attention. “The plaintiff had big expectations for this case,” said Miller Barondess LLP partner J. Mira Hashmall, who led the defense for the county. The county’s position was that the firing was for cause. “We were fully prepared to document deficiencies in [Gonzales’] performance, but then the timing issue arose,” Hashmall said.
But a shorter route to disposing of the claims came to light.
Hashmall and her team argued that Gonzales was not only terminated for performance-related reasons, but that his claims were untimely. Gonzales contended the action was subject to a one-year filing period based on special damages, including lost wages. The defense contended the case was governed by the six-month deadline.
Noting that Gonzales sought general damages, the trial court applied the shorter limitations period consistent with Court of Appeal precedent. It held that Gonzales’ claim failed as a matter of law because his claim was late, his late-claim application was denied and Gonzales never petitioned for relief from the claim deadline as required by the Government Claims Act. The court dismissed the action as procedurally barred.
“They couldn’t dispute our timing arguments,” Hashmall said. “We were set for trial, and we positioned our case to have both timing and substantive arguments.” Adolfo Gonzales v. County of Los Angeles, 24STCV-03333 (L.A. Super. Ct., filed Feb. 8, 2024).
Gonzales has appealed. His attorney, Michael A. Conger of Rancho Santa Fe, emailed that the case is far from over. “Rather than address the merits of the County’s motion for summary judgment, the trial judge held that this was a ‘personal injury case’ and a claim had to be filed within six months
of Gonzales’ termination,” Conger said, arguing that the relevant Government Code actually specifies a one-year time limit for filing a case.
“Gonzalez filed his claim after six months, but before one year of his termination,” Conger added. “The case is on appeal because the trial court misapplied the clear language of the statute. The appeal is just getting underway.”
Reprinted with permission from the Daily Journal ©2026 Daily Journal Corporation. All rights reserved. Reprinted by ReprintPros 949-702-5390.