Snag in suit of ex-LAUSD official who criticized Miramonte payout
Craig Clough | December 15, 2014
Your donation will help us produce journalism like this. Please give today.
A judge ruled today that a former LA Unified official’s lawsuit that claims his contract was not renewed in retaliation for criticizing the district’s handling of the Miramonte Elementary sex abuse case cannot move forward without more information being added to the complaint.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Richard Fruin found that there are not enough details in Gregg Breed‘s complaint to support all of his lawsuit’s allegations, particularly in the areas of retaliation, breach of contract and unjust enrichment, City News Service reported.
The same judge ruled last week that LA Unified’s lawsuit against Breed that charges him with leaking confidential documents to the media can move forward.
The lawsuits are all connected to the case of former Miramonte Elementary School teacher Mark Berndt, who was convicted last year of committing 23 counts of lewd conduct and sentenced to 25 years in prison. After settling with a number of student victims for $30 million, the district in November reached a record settlement of $139 million with the remaining victims.
The lawsuits between Breed, the district’s former chief risk officer, and the district stem from the cases involving the original $30 million. In a lawsuit filed in January, Breed claims his contract with the district was not renewed in 2013 after he communicated both internally and to the media that the case was mishandled by inexperienced lawyers who were hired as a result of LAUSD cronyism.
Breed told NBC Los Angeles he had proof that the district paid $470,000 apiece to three students who were not actually abused by Berndt.
The district’s lawsuit, filed in 2013, claims Breed leaked confidential papers to the media related to the Miramonte case, a suit that Fruin ruled last week can move forward. Breed’s attorneys had sought dismissal of the lawsuit, arguing that he was being punished for being a whistleblower and speaking out about alleged corruption in the district.