SAN DIEGO — A jury in San Diego County has concluded that a former high-ranking prosecutor from Orange County was compelled to retire due to harassment orchestrated by the county’s District Attorney, Todd Spitzer, and his first assistant, Shawn Nelson, who currently serves as a Superior Court judge.
Tracy Miller, who had spent 25 years in the Orange County District Attorney’s office, filed a whistleblower retaliation and harassment lawsuit after her retirement. The jury awarded her $3 million in economic damages and an additional $25,000 in punitive damages specifically against Spitzer, while finding that Nelson did not act maliciously in the matter.
The jury also determined that Orange County failed to adequately intervene in the harassment. Miller’s attorney, Bijan Darvish, had sought $330,000 in punitive damages from Spitzer, arguing it represented roughly 10% of Spitzer’s salary for the years he allegedly undermined her career. Legal fees from the county are anticipated to amount to around $1 million.
Spitzer testified after the jury’s decision, stating that his wife manages their household finances, leaving him unaware of their financial specifics. He expressed concern that the punitive damages could significantly impact his family’s future. As he prepares to turn 65 in November, Spitzer indicated he might not pursue re-election, hinting at a potential retirement within the next two years.
In his testimony, Spitzer acknowledged that his family owns three properties—two that are rented and one they occupy. He also noted his participation in three pension plans tied to his public service career, which could complicate their financial situation further.
Darvish urged the jurors to impose a punitive damages award that would send a clear message against such misconduct, aimed at deterring future harassment of witnesses. Meanwhile, county attorney Tracey Kennedy contended that the jury’s verdict already served as a substantial penalty for Spitzer, suggesting that his career as District Attorney may be short-lived.
The case was moved to San Diego County to avoid possible bias due to Spitzer’s prominent role in Orange County’s legal system. Key testimonies included that of Orange County Superior Court Judge Chris Duff, along with evidence pertaining to Judge Ebrahim Baytieh.
The jury decided on multiple points, with seven unanimous and others divided—some votes indicated significant agreement on Miller’s claims of harassment and retaliation. During her tenure, Miller had achieved a senior assistant district attorney position for approximately three years.
In her lawsuit, Miller argued that she was forced to retire due to a toxic work environment created after she attempted to protect younger prosecutors who reported being harassed by another prosecutor, Gary LoGalbo, who was Spitzer’s close associate. LoGalbo passed away before the trial could take place.
Throughout the trial, Miller’s attorney highlighted instances in which Spitzer mocked fellow employees and belittled female managers. This included a specific incident where Spitzer displayed a video of a colleague engaging in pole fitness at an office meeting, a move that Miller found to be both humiliating and indicative of a broader pattern of harassment.
Kennedy, representing the county, maintained that Miller was not a victim of retaliation and pointed out that her promotion upon Spitzer taking office contradicted the claims of harassment. Both sides presented conflicting narratives regarding the motivations and implications of Spitzer’s actions and decisions while in office.
Testimonies from Miller’s peers further described a hostile work atmosphere, where women were often dismissed as “babysitters” managing rookie prosecutors rather than respected colleagues. Miller’s concerns about office dynamics and the treatment of women were underscored during her testimony.
In his closing arguments, Darvish argued that Spitzer focused blame on others to deflect criticism from himself, particularly concerning negative media attention. He claimed that Miller was unfairly targeted for speaking out against Spitzer’s controversial interactions, including one involving a mass shooting victim’s father.
This case serves as a prominent example of the far-reaching consequences workplace harassment can yield, not just for victims but for those in positions of power who engage in or allow such behavior.
This article was automatically written by Open AI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by emailing contact@publiclawlibrary.org.