By McKenzie Jackson | California Black Media
Lawyers for La-Kebbia “Kiki” Wilson, a Black woman who won a $15 million racial discrimination lawsuit against the City of Fresno in March, fired back at the city’s motion for a new trial with a pointed response, calling it a distortion of the facts.
Wilson’s attorneys, Gary G. Goyette and Kevin Schwin, said in their 32-page notice to U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California Judge Kirk E. Sheriff that the city presented a “watered-down version of the facts” that ignores egregious conduct Wilson suffered and dismisses the reputational harm caused to her on grounds unsupported by law.
The lawyers, who also represent Wilson’s co-plaintiff Charles Smith, insist the jury’s unanimous verdict was objective and should stand. You
“Contrary to the City’s arguments, the jury followed the law,” they wrote in the notice dated May 20. “The verdict is supported by the evidence and is entitled to great deference by the Court. However, to the extent the Court is inclined to remit the damages, any remittitur must reflect the maximum amount sustainable by the proof.”
The case centers on allegations of years of racial harassment, retaliation, and inadequate oversight within Fresno’s Code Enforcement Department. A federal jury ruled in favor of Wilson, who worked as a Community Revitalization Specialist from 2004 to 2013 and again from 2016 to 2022. The jury also sided with Smith, a former part-time and later full-time Code Enforcement employee, holding the city liable and awarding him $400,000 in damages.
The lawsuit describes repeated racial harassment by supervisor Howard Lacy — including calling Wilson an “entitled n****r” in 2018 — and retaliation after complaints were raised, while Fresno’s leadership failed to respond. The allegations date back as far as the early 2000s.
Wilson cried when the jury ruled in her favor.
“I was so happy the jury believed I was the person I said I was,” she said. “For Black people in general, we want people to respect us for who we are — not what we are stereotyped to be.”
“I wasn’t thinking about money at all,” Wilson added. “I felt vindicated.”
Fresno’s attorneys filed a motion for a new trial or a partial new trial to reduce the damages in April. They wrote that the March 11 judgment in favor of Wilson and Smith “exceeds awards that case law has held excessive, despite more concrete proof of more severe emotional distress in those other cases.”
“Despite a record that objectively supports a sum lower than in other reported cases, this jury returned an award that far exceeds other amounts that have been judicially found to be excessive,” the 30-page motion read. “A trial judge has both broad authority and a duty to intervene where a damages award is excessive. Not only does the size of the verdict alone warrant such intervention, but so do other circumstances that indicate that a judge’s moderation should accompany the jury’s verdict.”
When contacted by California Black Media (CBM), spokespersons for the Fresno City Attorney’s Office and Whitney, Thompson & Jeffcoach LLP declined to comment.
In the days after the trial, Fresno City Councilmember Miguel Arias urged the city not to appeal, saying further litigation is costly and unjust to Fresno taxpayers.
“The conduct described in this case was wrong and reprehensible and does not reflect the values of our city or the safe, respectful workplace every employee deserves,” Arias said. “It is time for the City to take responsibility, resolve this matter, and learn from the mistakes that were made under the prior city attorney.”
The next hearing is scheduled for June 15, continuing a long-running legal battle that began with the lawsuit’s filing in 2019.
In their filing, Wilson’s lawyers reiterated her claims — including that Lacy called her lazy and dishonest and pressured co-workers to stay away from her — and argued in favor of the jury’s verdict.
Goyette and Schwin wrote that the jury carefully weighed the evidence over two days, even ruling in the city’s favor on some issues and awarding Smith less than requested. They said jurors accurately assessed emotional distress damages.
“For these reasons, determinations about ‘intangible, non-economic losses’ are ‘peculiarly within a jury’s ken,’” they wrote.
They also argued that the jury’s finding is legally protected and entitled to respect.
“A district court may not grant a new trial simply because it would have arrived at a different verdict,” they said. Oh
The amount awarded is tied to the scope and severity of the harm done to Wilson, according to their filing. The attorneys said she experienced intimacy problems with her husband, was diagnosed with anxiety, developed heart problems, and experienced weight gain, insomnia, hair loss, and social withdrawal as a result of what she endured. Wilson’s reputation was also tarnished professionally by years of discrimination and retaliation by Lacy.
“It negatively impacted literally everything that is meaningful in life — her family, her career, her health, and her relationships with other people,” the lawyers said.
They also rejected Fresno’s argument that damages should be reduced under federal limits, noting the case includes state law claims that allow higher awards.
Wilson said the city tried to portray her as an “angry Black woman,” adding that anyone would react to the treatment she endured.
“Black, white, Hispanic, Asian,” she said. “Anyone would be angry. We need to start normalizing Black women’s anger. I’m not a robot. I get emotional sometimes. Black women are human. I have a right to be upset when people are hurting me.”
Wilson said the case is emotional but remains committed to seeing it through.
“They don’t care anything about what this verdict was,” she said about the city. “They acknowledge that something happened but say it wasn’t on their watch.”