Drevaleva v. Alameda Health System

Background

Alameda Health System moved to declare Tatyana Evgenievna Drevaleva a vexatious litigant, require her to obtain court approval before making additional filings, and require her to post a $50,000 bond before continuing litigation in this case. The court stated that Drevaleva’s complaint had already been dismissed without leave, so it granted the first two requests and denied the bond request as moot.

The opinion recounts that Alameda Health System hired Drevaleva as a monitor technician in 2013. After she questioned her employment status, unpaid shift differentials and overtime, work breaks, and the denial of a request for union affiliation, Alameda Health System terminated her. She later brought retaliation and wage claims before the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, which determined that the termination was for a nondiscriminatory reason and that she had not shown pretext.

The court stated that Drevaleva had brought dozens of cases against Alameda Health System and the California Department of Industrial Relations or its Division of Labor Standards Enforcement. It also stated that she had sued judges who ruled against her and attorneys representing Alameda Health System and the Division. A California appeals court had already declared her a vexatious litigant.

Legal standard

A vexatious-litigant order restricts a person’s ability to file certain cases or motions because of abusive litigation conduct. Under the standards cited by the court, a federal court must provide notice and an opportunity to oppose the order, develop an adequate record, make substantive findings that the conduct was frivolous or harassing, and narrowly tailor the restrictions to the misconduct.

Court’s analysis

The court found that Drevaleva had notice of the motion and an opportunity to respond. It reviewed a nonexhaustive list of her federal and state proceedings, including cases involving Alameda Health System, the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, judges, and attorneys. The court noted that several earlier courts had expressly found her claims or appeals frivolous.

The court also found repeated duplicative filings and harassment. It cited filings against state and federal judges, litigation against Alameda Health System’s attorneys, requests for criminal restraining orders against those attorneys, and pending cases against attorneys for the Division and Alameda Health System. The court stated that Alameda Health System had incurred $259,185 in legal fees and $8,572 in related expenses associated with Drevaleva’s litigation.

The court concluded that sanctions other than a pre-filing order were unlikely to protect the court and the parties because Drevaleva had continued filing after being declared a vexatious litigant in state court and after receiving warnings that her claims were frivolous.

Disposition

The court found Alameda Health System’s proposed restriction too broad because it would have required Drevaleva to obtain approval before pursuing any litigation or filing any new motion. Instead, the court declared Drevaleva a vexatious litigant and ordered her to obtain pre-filing approval in the Northern District of California before filing pro se cases or new motions against Alameda Health System or the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, or their employees, officers, agents, or counsel, when the filing concerns her prior employment with Alameda Health System or the Division’s adjudication of her claims against Alameda Health System.

The court stated that the restriction did not deny Drevaleva general access to the courts, but subjected the specified filings to initial screening. It granted the motion in part, denied the bond request as moot, and stated that the order disposed of Docket No. 25.