In an action for whistleblower retaliation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and conducting a negligent investigation into complaints of harassment and retaliation, trial court grant of summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff's claim that there was a negligent investigation into complaints of harassment and retaliation fails as plaintiff did not demonstrate that the department's written policy on behavior norms creates legally enforceable duties on the department that compels a careful investigation when a complaint is lodged that an employee has violated the behavior norms of the department; 2) plaintiff's claim that the department's actions violated whistleblower laws fails as neither LA County Code sec. 5.02.060 (a) nor Labor Code Section 1102.5 applies; 3) plaintiff cannot receive an independent recovery for intentional infliction of emotional distress in the employment arena as that injury comes under the exclusive remedy of worker's compensation laws; 4) plaintiff was not prejudiced when the court did not take up his request for a continuance and his ex parte application, as his cause of action for retaliation had no legal basis and therefore there was no need for the trial court to rule on them; and 5) there are no inaccuracies in the judgment.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, John Shepard Wiley, Jr., Judge. Affirmed.
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE
Filed August 13, 2009
Before CROSKEY, J., KLEIN, P. J., KITCHING, J.
Opinion by CROSKEY, J.