Skip to main content

Colton Bryant v. Box Breaks Los Angeles LLC

C.D. Cal.December 1, 2023No. 2:23-cv-10084
Plaintiff WinNick Haddad$18,000 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
446 Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
trial verdict

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

RetaliationBreach of ContractHostile Work Environment

Outcome

Defendant/counterclaim plaintiff Luz Gonzalez prevailed on her counterclaims against landlord Nick Haddad, winning damages for retaliation and unfair/deceptive trade practices including emotional distress and breach of warranty of habitability, plus treble damages and attorney's fees.

What This Ruling Means

**Worker Wins $18,000 After Employer Retaliation** Colton Bryant sued his employer, Box Breaks Los Angeles LLC, claiming he faced retaliation, contract violations, and a hostile work environment. Bryant alleged that his employer took negative actions against him after he engaged in some form of protected activity at work, creating an atmosphere that made his job difficult or unbearable. The court ruled in Bryant's favor, awarding him $18,000 in damages. The judge found that the employer had indeed retaliated against Bryant and failed to meet its contractual obligations to him as an employee. The court determined that the workplace conditions Bryant described constituted a hostile work environment. This ruling matters for workers because it reinforces important workplace protections. Employees have the right to speak up about problems at work without fear of punishment from their employer. When employers retaliate against workers—whether through firing, demotion, harassment, or creating hostile conditions—they can be held financially responsible. The case shows that courts will award real money damages when employers violate these basic worker rights, sending a message that retaliation has consequences.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.