> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Case against city a valuable lesson
- URL: https://www.smdp.com/case-against-city-a-valuable-lesson/
- Published: 2006-03-24T16:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-23T17:23:18.000Z
- Author: Kevin Herrera
- Tags: Crime, Downtown, #archive-import

*Grounds for appeal: Case attracts students*

USC — A gender and age discrimination lawsuit filed against City Hall served as a teaching tool for law students here Wednesday, as lawyers for both sides argued before three state appellate court judges.

The arguments were brief, lasting less than an hour, with the jurors asking both attorneys just five questions about the case. A ruling is expected within 60 days.

At stake in the case is the future of Pat Gordon, a city groundskeeper whose job it is to make sure the beauty of Santa Monica’s open space is maintained. Gordon contends she has been unjustly passed over for promotions because she is a 60-year-old woman.

Every so often, the Second District Court of Appeals for the state will hold a session outside of its chambers at the Ronald Reagan Building in downtown Los Angeles as a means of educating the community about the appeals process, a spokeswoman for the court said. The court has held sessions at Loyola Marymount and Southwestern law schools.

USC Law students on hand busily scribbled notes on the appeals process.

It seemed like home-court advantage for Deputy City Attorney Lance Gams, a graduate of USC Law School, who argued cases before a mock court in the very room where Wednesday’s proceedings took place.

“There was definitely a level of comfort there I wouldn’t have had anywhere else,” said Gams, who made a short, 10-minute presentation before the court. “It was kind of fun.”

Gordon, who has worked for the city for 15 years and holds degrees in organic agriculture, said she was prohibited from taking a test to become a supervisor. She believes it is because of her age, 60, and her gender, as well as retaliation for speaking up for temporary employees, whom she said have been excluded from taking a test to become permanent employees.

“I have been passed over for promotion so many times, and not by those who were more qualified than me, but by men who either scored the same as me on the test or lower,” she said. “I have maintained all of my areas organically and have proven myself through my work. I think I should be allowed to take the supervisor’s test, even though I’m not a supervisor.”

Gams said Gordon did not qualify to take the test.

“There are many arguments … and I have a response for every one of them,” Gams said. “But the bottom line is that she didn’t meet the minimum qualifications, not because of her age or her gender.”

A lower court previously ruled in favor of City Hall.

*Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on March 24, 2006.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/032406.pdf?ref=smdp.com)