Superior Appellate Supreme
State
Superior Court of California, County of Orange California Court of Appeals CA Supreme Court

Wyer v. Tesla, Inc. et al.

State Civil Lawsuit California Court of Appeals, Case No. G062810
Tags
Last Updated June 20, 2024 at 4:13 PM EDT (7 months ago) Update UpdateSpaceE-Mail Alert AlertsSpaceJump Jump
Summary
Saturday was my birthday. I am now 67. According to 2022 data, nearly 58 million adults ages 65 and older live in the U.S., accounting for about 17.3% of the nation's population. We are all aging.

In 2015, I was clinically diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) – Asperger’s disorder previously DSM-IV. I am very high-functioning. I am neurodivergent. I am not a malingerer or paranoid schizophrenic, as Tesla's attorney and hand-picked psychiatrist defamatorily alleged.

In January 2019, I was nearly 62 years old when I was brutally and illegally terminated. I was given no notice. I was left with no future. I was over the age of 40 during the time of grievance.

In 2023, the CDC reported that an estimated 5,437,988 (2.21%) adults in the U.S. have ASD. This statistic includes my wife, our adult son, and me. All three of us have been clinically diagnosed with ASD. Consider for a moment that every person diagnosed with ASD has a mother, father, grandparents, and other family members. Moreover, there are an estimated 74 million of us worldwide. We aren’t malingerers. We are consumers, employees, and neighbors.

At the time I was illegally fired, I was the sole breadwinner and support for my autistic son. All three of us were left without insurance, which meant that we faced the pandemic without healthcare coverage. Even though I am now of full retirement age, I am not at a place where I can stop working. Tesla withdrew tens of thousands of dollars of stock options that I counted on and needed to seed my retirement and to sustain my fully autistic adult stepson, who I have been supporting for nearly 15 years. Statistically, he will always be underemployed and underpaid. This is a proven fact. According to various studies and statistics, the autism unemployment rate is estimated to be about 85%, depending on the specific population and criteria used for measurement.

I represent pro per. The heart of my case is that Tesla, Inc. illegally terminated me violating FEHA and well-established public policy. My termination was brutal. Besides income, work remains my main source of social interaction outside my immediate family. I thrive on working. I perseverate on the work that I do. I was honored to work for Tesla because of its mission.

1) I have a disability (ASD and hypertension) that requires emergency care).

2) I requested accommodations and unilaterally attempted to engage in a good-faith interactive process and was denied. My main request focused on having my team stop discriminating and retaliating.

3) I was almost 62 years old when I was illegally fired. I was replaced immediately (3 days later) by a software engineer from a foreign country who was approximately half my age, and who was paid 1.5 times more than me. Coworkers commented about my age and indicated that I was an “old man.”

4) I complained that my manager and my co-workers were engaging in sexual harassment and offensive communications referring to their penis sizes on Tesla’s communications network. Also, sexual videos of women twerking were placed in the team’s chat and displayed women’s breasts. Reporting was required by Tesla’s own Sexual Harassment and Bullying Training Program. More retaliation ensued after I reported through "proper" channels.

5) I was forced to open a workers’ compensation case for injuries I sustained as a result of work-related stress. I was awarded $45,000 for this claim.

6) Moreover, I was fired because I engaged in whistleblowing regarding sexual harassment, sabotage, and other potential security issues. Whistleblowing is a protected activity.
The Superior Court finalized a prejudicial arbitration decision based on suppressed evidence, limited Witness testimony, denied discovery, and reduced hearing time, which was biased and unfair. I am appealing the finalization of the Court's decision to finalize the arbitrator's award.

As of January 3, 2024, my case has been fully briefed. As of February 10, I am 67.


As of June 20, 2024

The Appellate Court agreed with the Superior Court's decision. I lost my appeal.

As of September 2, 2024

More information is being posted about this case. Look for regular updates. http://wyervstesla.com

Last Edited by David Wyer

Parties
No Logo David Wyer, Plaintiff - Appellant
Other Parties
No Logo Carson Schafer, Defendant - Respondent
No Logo Christoper Rollins, Defendant - Respondent
Tesla, Inc. Tesla, Inc., Defendant - Respondent
Attributes
Timeline
  Entries (44) Tab Overlap Calendar Events Tab Overlap Related (0) Tab Overlap Tools Right End
Save 25% on a pre-paid one year subscription.
Legal Document 44 Filed: 5/31/2024, Entered: None
Opinion filed.: (Signed Unpublished) The judgment is affirmed. (Gooding)/Bedsworth/Delaney
Blank 43 Filed: 3/22/2024, Entered: None
Cause argued and submitted.: Merits. Cause called. David Wyer in propria persona no appearance. Keiko Kojima argued for respondent. Cause submitted.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 42 Filed: 2/27/2024, Entered: None
Note: No opposition filed. Due 2-26-24.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 41 Filed: 2/15/2024, Entered: None
Order filed.: Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 8.155(a)(l)(A), the court intends to augment the record on appeal on its own motion to include the following documents, all of which were filed in the Orange County Superior Court, case No. 30-2019- 01118759, and are attached hereto: (1) Declaration of David Wyer in Support of Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration, filed October 2, 2020; (2) Plaintiff David Wyer's Opposition to Defendant Tesla, Inc. 's Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Litigation; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof, filed October 5, 2020; and (3) Minute Order, filed October 15, 2020. Any party may file opposition to this proposed action no later than 10 days from the date of this order. Oral argument remains set for March 22, 2024, at 1 :30 p.m.Mailed to aplt
Request RequestSpace
Blank 40 Filed: 2/13/2024, Entered: None
Calendar notice sent electronically. Calendar date:
Request RequestSpace
Blank 39 Filed: 1/30/2024, Entered: None
Note: No oppo filed as to order of 01-18-24.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 38 Filed: 1/19/2024, Entered: None
Order on motion filed.: Plaintiff and Appellant David Wyer filed a motion to augment the record, pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 8.155(a). Appellant seeks to augment the record with 33 volumes of documents consisting of 7782 pages. These documents were not before the trial court when it ruled on the parties' dueling petitions to confirm and vacate the arbitration award and do not constitute a record of the oral proceedings in the trial court. Appellant's motion to augment the record is DENIED. Defendants and Respondents Tesla, Inc., et al., filed a motion to strike the documents submitted in support of the motion to augment the record and to strike portions of Appellant's reply brief. The motion to strike the documents submitted in support of the motion to augment the record is DENIED AS MOOT in light of this court's ruling on the motion to augment the record. The motion to strike portions of the reply brief is DENIED. This court will not consider any arguments in the reply brief based solely on the contents of the proposed augmented record. Mailed to appellant
Request RequestSpace
Legal Document 37 Filed: 1/19/2024, Entered: None
Motion filed.: Respondent's motion to strike appellant's extra record documents and portions of appellants reply brief
Blank 36 Filed: 1/19/2024, Entered: None
Returned document for non-conformance.: Respondent's motion to strike appellant's extra record documents and portions of appellants reply brief have been returned. Pagination needs to be corrected. The cover is page is 1 and every page after is consecutively numbered till the end of the document. Please review rule 8.74.
Request RequestSpace
Legal Document 35 Filed: 1/18/2024, Entered: None
Order filed.: Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 8.155(a)(1)(A), the court intends to augment the record on appeal on its own motion to include the following documents, all of which were filed in the Orange County Superior Court, case No. 30-2019-01118759, on January 12, 2023, and are attached hereto: (1) Petition to Vacate Contractual Arbitration Award; (2) Declaration of Christopher J. DeClue in Support of Plaintiff David Wyer's Motion to Vacate Arbitrator's Award and to Return the Case to the Civil Active List; and (3) Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Plaintiff's Motion to Vacate Arbitrator's Award and to Return the Case to the Civil Active List. Any party may file opposition to this proposed action no later than 10 days from the date of this order.
Blank 34 Filed: 1/18/2024, Entered: None
Opposition filed.: Respondent's opo to Appellant's motion to augment the record
Request RequestSpace
Blank 33 Filed: 1/18/2024, Entered: None
To court.: Aplt's motion to augment.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 32 Filed: 12/21/2023, Entered: None
Case briefed and on assignment panel.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 31 Filed: 1/3/2024, Entered: None
Case fully briefed.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 30 Filed: 1/3/2024, Entered: None
Received document entitled: Documents in support of motion to augment Volumes 32-33. (33 volumes total, 7782 pages)
Request RequestSpace
Blank 29 Filed: 1/3/2024, Entered: None
Received document entitled: Documents in support of motion to augment. Volumes 1-31. (33 volumes total, 7782 pages)
Request RequestSpace
Blank 28 Filed: 1/3/2024, Entered: None
Motion/application to augment record filed.: Aplt's motion to augment.
Request RequestSpace
Legal Document 27 Filed: 1/3/2024, Entered: None
Appellant's reply brief.: Plaintiff and Appellant: David Wyer Pro Per Two extensions granted for a total of 30 days: 11/27/2023 Granted - extension of time. Due on 12/20/2023 By 21 Day(s) 12/18/2023 Requested - extension of time. Requested for 12/29/2023 By 9 Day(s) 12/19/2023 Granted - extension of time. Due on 12/29/2023 By 9 Day(s)
Blank 26 Filed: 1/2/2024, Entered: None
Returned document for non-conformance.: Motion to augment has been returned. 1. Per rule 8.74 (a)(9) You must have a cover pages for every volume. 2. Volumes 7 and 8 of your exhibits in support of your motion to augment are not paginated.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 25 Filed: 1/2/2024, Entered: None
Returned document for non-conformance.: Appellants reply brief has been returned. 1. Proof of service to Superior Court is missing. 2. Per rule 8.204 (c) Brief exceeds word count of 14,000. Must submit an application to file an oversized brief along with your reply brief. 3. Per rule 8.204 (d) Attachments to briefs must not exceed combined total of 10 pages (you have 11 pages attached to your brief).
Request RequestSpace
Blank 24 Filed: 12/19/2023, Entered: None
Granted - extension of time.: Appellant's request for an extension of time to file appellant's reply brief is GRANTED. Appellant is granted to December 29, 2023, to file appellant's reply brief.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 23 Filed: 12/18/2023, Entered: None
Requested - extension of time
Request RequestSpace
Blank 22 Filed: 11/29/2023, Entered: None
Request for oral argument filed by: Atty Keiko Kojima will argue for respondents - 15 minutes.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 21 Filed: 11/29/2023, Entered: None
Returned document for non-conformance.: Respondents request for oral argument, incorrect e-mail address ( Dave@WyersTesla.com) for appellant listed on the proof of service.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 20 Filed: 11/27/2023, Entered: None
Granted - extension of time.: Appellant's reply brief. Due on 12/20/2023 By 21 Day(s)
Request RequestSpace
Blank 19 Filed: 11/21/2023, Entered: None
Returned document for non-conformance.: Appellant's motion to augment has been returned. The motion needs to be separated from the exhibits in support of. The exhibits need to have a cover page, paginated correctly, and be bookmarked.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 18 Filed: 11/13/2023, Entered: None
Argument letter sent.
Request RequestSpace
Legal Document 17 Filed: 11/9/2023, Entered: None
Respondent's brief.: Defendant and Respondent: Tesla, Inc. Attorney: Keiko Jennifer Kojima Defendant and Respondent: Christoper Rollins Attorney: Keiko Jennifer Kojima Defendant and Respondent: Carson Schafer Attorney: Keiko Jennifer Kojima One extension granted for a total of 7 days: 11/07/2023 Granted - extension of time. Due on 11/13/2023 By 7 Day(s)
Blank 16 Filed: 11/7/2023, Entered: None
Misc. fee received for: Responsive fee
Request RequestSpace
Blank 15 Filed: 11/7/2023, Entered: None
Granted - extension of time.: Respondent's brief. Due on 11/13/2023 By 7 Day(s)
Request RequestSpace
Legal Document 14 Filed: 10/5/2023, Entered: None
Appellant's opening brief.
Blank 13 Filed: 10/5/2023, Entered: None
Appellant notified re failure to timely file opening brief.: If appellant's opening brief is not filed within 15 days after the date of this notice, the appeal may be dismissed. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.220(a)(1).) No additional notices under rule 8.220 will be issued, even if further extensions are granted.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 12 Filed: 10/4/2023, Entered: None
Returned document for non-conformance.: Appellant's opening brief has been returned. Please fix the following: 1.The Superior Court must be listed on the Proof of Service. 2. Must list exhibits on the table of contents 3. Must give a title/description of what that "attachment" is in the bookmark section, you cannot just label it Attachment 1 or attachment 2.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 11 Filed: 10/3/2023, Entered: None
Returned document for non-conformance.: Appellant's opening brief has been returned. Please fix the following: 1. Per rule 8.74(a)(3) you must bookmark your document. 2. Pagination is off. Please refer to rule 8.74(a)(2) regarding pagination 3. You cannot attach more then TEN pages of exhibits to your brief. You have attached more then 20 pages. 4. The Superior Court must be listed on the Proof of Service.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 10 Filed: 10/3/2023, Entered: None
Returned document for non-conformance.: Appellant's AOB has been returned. You cannot attach more then 10 pages of exhibits to your opening brief. All pages must be paginated consecutively. The cover is page 1 and is consecutively numbered all the way to the end of the document. The Superior Court needs to be served a copy of the brief and be placed on the proof of service.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 9 Filed: 8/24/2023, Entered: None
Letter sent advising record on appeal has been filed.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 8 Filed: 8/24/2023, Entered: None
Clerk's transcript filed.: 2 CT (503 pages) E-filed
Request RequestSpace
Blank 7 Filed: 8/3/2023, Entered: None
Received copy of: Notice of inability to provide reporter's transcript. There is no record of any reporter present on 4/29/2021, 7/7/2022, 10/6/2022 & 11/10/2022
Request RequestSpace
Blank 6 Filed: 8/3/2023, Entered: None
Appellant 's notice designating record on appeal filed in trial court on: Filed 6-23-23. Proceeding by CT W/ RT.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 5 Filed: 7/19/2023, Entered: None
Filing fee.: Paid by APLT
Request RequestSpace
Blank 4 Filed: 7/12/2023, Entered: None
Civil case information statement filed.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 3 Filed: 7/12/2023, Entered: None
Returned document for non-conformance.: CCIS has been returned. Need to correct the following: 1. 2a needs to be corrected on page 1 2. 2d needs to be corrected on page 1 You have "Tesla, Inc. et al" listed as a party on page 3 of 4. You either take off the "et al" or list all the parties A minute order and/or signed judgment of the date that is being appealed needs to be attached to your civil case information statement.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 2 Filed: 7/12/2023, Entered: None
Default notice sent; no case information statement filed, or statement incomplete.
Request RequestSpace
Blank 1 Filed: 6/26/2023, Entered: None
Notice of appeal lodged/received.: Appellant: David Wyer (in Pro Per)
Request RequestSpace

Statistics

This case has been viewed 1,580 times.

Space
Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
 

Non-Government Works Copyright © 2001-2025 Think Computer Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

About   Privacy   Security   Contact Us

No AI
This website does not use generative AI for text responses.

PlainSite
Sign Up
Need Password Help?