Samuel v. L.A. County Metropolitan Transportation Auth. CA2/8

Filed 2/29/24 Samuel v. L.A. County Metropolitan Transportation Auth. CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

MARLIN D. SAMUEL, B324906

Plaintiff and Appellant, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 21STCV23881 v.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Upinder S. Kalra, Judge. Affirmed. Marlin D. Samuel, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant. Gutierrez, Preciado & House and Calvin House for Defendant and Respondent.

____________________ Bus operator Marlin D. Samuel sued his employer, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (the Authority) for breach of contract. Samuel says the Authority entered a contract with him when, during a disciplinary hearing against him, he made an unintelligible statement and the hearing officer responded, “Okay. Noted. Anything else?” As a matter of law there was no breach of contract, for there was no contract. Samuel makes other unavailing arguments. The trial court properly granted judgment on the pleadings and denied his request to amend the complaint. We affirm. We outline the facts and turn to Samuel’s arguments. The Authority held a disciplinary hearing about Samuel’s alleged use of a cell phone while driving a bus. The hearing lasted about 40 minutes and 20 transcript pages. Samuel’s union representative challenged the Authority’s video evidence. Samuel then said he “just ha[d] a couple of questions” for the hearing officer. For about six transcript pages, Samuel asked questions and made statements about the Authority’s disciplinary procedures. For example, he said the Authority should have given him more notice before it put him on administrative leave and the hearing officer said, “Okay. It’s noted.” Then Samuel and the hearing officer had an exchange Samuel says created a contract. Samuel read two sentences of his union contract and said to the hearing officer, “So any unacknowledgement of the contract would be a willful breach of contract. And if it’s a willful breach of contract knowing the rules and regulations set forth, then you subjugate yourself to state and federal penalties and fines outside the contractual agreement