Fired County Official Loses Right to Sue

A state appellate court Tuesday rejected a request to reopen a wrongful-termination suit filed against the county by a former Department of General Services director, saying that Hilario D. (Larry) Gonzales had not brought the case to trial soon enough.

State law requires that a civil case go to trial within five years after it is filed or be dismissed. Gonzales’ case, which alleged that he was fired wrongly in connection with the so-called Telink scandal, was simply nowhere near trial after more than five years, the 4th District Court of Appeal said.

Gonzales contended that he hadn’t acted on the civil case because he was preoccupied with related criminal charges against him in federal court.

But, because Gonzales made no attempt to do preliminary work on the civil case or seek a postponement while the federal case worked itself out, that argument did not wash, a three-judge panel of the 4th District court ruled unanimously.

Both cases grew out of the awarding in the early 1980s of a $24.5-million contract for a telephone system to Telink Inc. of Anaheim. Later, it was alleged that bids for the contract had been rigged and, on Dec. 16, 1982, Gonzales was fired.

At one point, Dist. Atty. Edwin Miller called the Telink scandal the “most massive fraud and public corruption scheme ever perpetrated against the county of San Diego.”

Telink and its parent company, Florida-based Burnup & Sims, eventually pleaded no contest to criminal charges against them and agreed to pay more than $1 million for prosecution costs of the 13 individuals and two corporations indicted by the federal grand jury.

On Dec. 16, 1983, Gonzales filed the civil suit in San Diego Superior Court, asking for money damages. On Oct. 31, 1984, the federal grand jury indicted him and several others on charges of bid-rigging and accepting bribes and payoffs.

On July 28, 1988, a mistrial was declared in the federal case against Gonzales. On Oct. 6, 1988, the federal charges were dismissed.

On May 23, 1989, Gonzales asked that the civil case be kept alive. But, with only a complaint in the civil case on file, San Diego Superior Court Judge Judith McConnell turned him down, saying that he “failed to show any attempt” to move the case along.

The 4th District court agreed with McConnell, rejecting Gonzales’ claim that he could not have proceeded with the civil suit because any information he disclosed would have violated his right to stay silent in the criminal case.

That, Judge Patricia Benke said, was a potential problem that could have been handled if Gonzales had exchanged any information--in a process called “discovery”--on the civil case. Since, at his own risk, he attempted no discovery, he had to bear the consequence, meaning the dismissal of the civil suit, Benke said.

Judges Don R. Work and Charles W. Froehlich Jr. concurred.