Title: Schifando v. City of L.A.
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: S106660M
State: California
Issuer: California Supreme Court
Date: December 23, 2003

Filed 12/23/03 
 
 
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 
STEVE SCHIFANDO, 
) 
 
 
) 
 
Plaintiff and Appellant, 
) 
 
 
) 
S106660 
 
v. 
) 
 
 
) 
Ct.App. 2/3 B142999 
CITY OF LOS ANGELES, 
) 
 
 
) 
Los Angeles County 
 
Defendant and Respondent. 
) 
Super. Ct. No. BC219557 
___________________________________ ) 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
MODIFICATION OF OPINION 
 
The opinion herein, filed December 1, 2003, appearing at ___ Cal.4th ___ 
[2003 Cal. Lexis 9268], is modified as follows: 
1.  On page 10, of the majority slip opinion, delete the first full paragraph 
and substitute the following language:  “On a final note, we are not concerned that 
all public employees, and in particular those employees with a routine 
administrative claim for compensation or reinstatement will choose to bypass the 
summary and expeditious procedures and remedies the City Charter provides in 
order to proceed directly to a jury trial to seek an award of compensatory or 
punitive damages.”   
2.  On pages 11-13, footnote 6, of the majority slip opinion, delete the 
footnote as written, and substitute the following language:  “One note of caution is 
required.  In the present action, Schifando filed the FEHA claim only.  We 
 
 
therefore need not decide whether his failure to exhaust the City’s procedures 
would have barred any other claim based on the same acts by the City.”   
 
This modification does not affect the judgment.