43.3 F
Milpitas
Tuesday, February 18, 2025
NewsGovernmentEx-city manager seeks to penalize Milpitas, claims former mayor Rich Tran refused...

Ex-city manager seeks to penalize Milpitas, claims former mayor Rich Tran refused to appear

The legal battle between former Milpitas City Manager Steve McHarris and the City of Milpitas continues… 

Last week, court documents showed that McHarris filed a new motion against the City of Milpitas, claiming that former Mayor Rich Tran did not appear to complete his deposition on December 23, 2024, the date that it had been noticed for.

Stated the motion: “Tran’s arrogant and unjustified refusal to permit his deposition to be completed, as set forth in this motion, is no less flagrant and egregious than that of a plaintiff who refuses to be deposed about his or her own case.” 

It went on to state: “Not only did Tran refuse to appear to be deposed, he is also lying about it. He claims not to have been available on December 23, 2024, for a properly noticed deposition, while – at the same time – he was making social media posts from Milpitas and San Jose.” 

Toward the end of 2023, McHarris filed a lawsuit against the City of Milpitas, citing wrongful termination. In the lawsuit, he named Rich Tran, who served as mayor of Milpitas from 2016 to 2022, as having played a role in creating a hostile work environment while McHarris was in the City Manager role. 

On April 24, 2024, Tran had appeared for the first part of his deposition; at the close of his interview, he agreed to come back and complete it. 

Last year, after withdrawing as a mayoral candidate in the 2024 election, Tran left for Vietnam, stating that he had business to conduct out there. But Tran came back into town for the holidays – and posted about it on social media. 

On Christmas day, Tran made a live video at the pickleball courts at Hall Memorial Park. And on New Year’s Eve, he put up posts showing that he was out attending a party with others. 

An email exchange from mid-December between the two lawyers on both sides of the lawsuit shows that Tran was not responsive to emails asking if he was going to show for the deposition. 

Earlier this week, The Beat reached out to Tran to ask why he never made it to his deposition. He said in reply: I did not have any deposition scheduled. I know they wanted to schedule one but we were never able to schedule a time.” 

He added that he had seen emails requesting his presence in January, but that he wouldn’t be able to make it due to travel. 

On January 3, 2025, Nadia Bermudez, an attorney with Meyers Nave, which is representing the City of Milpitas, wrote to McHarris’ attorney Stephen Jaffe: 

“Unfortunately, Mr. Tran would not confirm his cooperation for a future deposition date. I explained to Mr. Tran that you may be seeking a court order per your statement to me. He informed me that he was travelling internationally for the foreseeable future and would not agree to sit for another date in the future.”  

Due to Tran’s unwillingness to complete his deposition, McHarris seeks court orders to strike the City’s defense, enter a default judgment, and impose $18,500 in monetary sanctions. ($18,500 is the amount of the attorney fees associated with the complaint.)

The motion underscores the critical role of Tran’s testimony and argues that his noncompliance severely prejudices McHarris’s ability to prepare for trial.

“Although he was present in Santa Clara County in December of 2024, and was specifically present and available from December 23, 2024, to January 1, 2025, I am informed and believe that Mr. Tran is now in Viet Nam, outside the jurisdiction of this court,” wrote McHarris’ attorney in a declaration. 

Meanwhile, the City of Milpitas is keeping quiet about the issue. As Assistant City Manager Matt Cano told The Beat, “While we understand the public interest surrounding the issue, it’s important for us to uphold our commitment to maintaining confidentiality and respecting the privacy of all involved parties. It is our policy to not comment on ongoing litigation. Thank you for understanding.”

 

-Adverstisement-spot_img
-Adverstisement-spot_img
-Adverstisement-spot_img
-Adverstisement-spot_img
-Adverstisement-spot_img

2 COMMENTS

  1. This is the problem with having an immature and volatile person in such an important position. As a tax payer I don’t want to foot the bill for fines due to his bad behavior. What is his responsibility and town’s recourse?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here