Trial looms in sexual harassment case against California state treasurer

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) — California State Treasurer Fiona Ma won a victory this week in the sexual harassment case against her, though the lawsuit continues to move toward trial.

Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Christopher Krueger denied Judith Blackwell’s motion for summary adjudication against the State Treasurer’s Office and Ma’s affirmative defenses.

It’s a ruling that falls on the heels of the judge’s mid-September decision that set aside Blackwell’s claims of race and disability discrimination, as well as wrongful termination in violation of public policy. But Krueger left on the table Blackwell’s claims of sexual harassment and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Blackwell — the former executive director of the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, under the auspices of Ma’s office — sued in 2021. She claims Ma made unwanted sexual advances toward her and fired her after she rebuffed them. Ma has said that Blackwell was fired for poor work performance.

Krueger’s initial tentative ruling, adopted Thursday, is the latest development in the lawsuit.

In May, Ma’s office filed its answer to Blackwell’s newest, amended complaint. Blackwell sought summary adjudication for most of the affirmative defenses made by Ma.

A motion for summary judgment, if granted, sets aside an entire case. Summary adjudication is for certain issues only, with others not selected still headed for trial.

The judge, however, denied all parts of Blackwell’s motion.

Krueger said a judge must grant such a motion if the evidence submitted shows there are no triable issues of material facts.

The judge listed a series of reasons for denying the different parts of Blackwell’s motion.

“Plaintiff presents a single material ‘fact’ stating the ‘affirmative defense is not well pled and consist of only legal conclusions,’” Krueger wrote. “The foregoing is not a material fact, but rather a legal argument.”

According to the judge, Blackwell has the burden to show that Ma and her office have no evidence to support their defense for Blackwell’s motion to prevail. Using the answer Ma’s office provided in its own legal filing doesn’t meet that burden.

Krueger also pointed to Blackwell’s lack of evidence to back up her claims that Ma’s affirmative defenses have no basis in fact.

At one point, Blackwell relied on her own declaration as evidence, which was missing from the court record.

“Despite this filing omission, even if the court considered Ms. Blackwell’s declaration submitted in support of her motion for summary adjudication of defendant Fiona Ma’s affirmative defenses, the evidence is inadequate,” the judge wrote.

Blackwell filed suit about six months after she was terminated.

In the lawsuit, she claims that she, Ma and another employee would eat dinner before staying at a hotel, after Ma noticed Blackwell didn’t leave work until 7 or 8 p.m. in February 2020. Ma shared a room with Blackwell and on multiple occasions “exposed her bare rear end.” Ma also bought gifts for Blackwell, including edible marijuana.

In May 2020, Ma began renting an Airbnb instead of the hotel room. Ma again exposed herself to Blackwell during this time and once climbed into her bed, Blackwell claims.

Blackwell said she had a stroke in September 2020 and left work for eight weeks. When she returned, she was given tasks that required two people to complete. Blackwell was fired months later.

Ma has argued Blackwell’s claims are “unremarkable events” that happen when people share living space.

“Blackwell’s own testimony establishes that the events were few in number, short in duration, no offensive words were spoken, and none involved physical contact,” Ma said.

Additionally, Ma says Blackwell only made a sexual harassment claim after she was fired.