A whistleblower's long-standing battle against a major educational institution has culminated in a legal defeat. On July 10, 2024, Mark Yeoh filed an appeal in the Court of Appeal of the State of California, Second Appellate District, Division Two, challenging a judgment that dismissed his claims against the Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE). The case was presided over by Judge Bruce Iwasaki and saw Yeoh alleging retaliation for his opposition to certain administrative decisions within LACOE.
Yeoh’s journey with LACOE began on February 14, 2000, when he was hired as an auditor. Over the years, he rose through the ranks to become a financial operations consultant for the southwest Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA). However, his troubles began in 2013 when he opposed efforts by Lawndale Elementary School District to take control of special education programs from LACOE. Yeoh believed that such takebacks would negatively impact students with disabilities due to inadequate resources at the district level. His opposition did not sit well with some higher-ups at LACOE, including then-Chief Financial Officer Alex Cherniss and Pat Smith.
According to Yeoh’s complaint, after voicing his concerns about the SELPA takeback to his superiors, he faced immediate retaliation. He was reassigned from his position as financial operations consultant—a move he described as an adverse employment action designed to tarnish his professional reputation and hinder future promotions. In January 2014, Yeoh received a negative performance review based on false allegations and was transferred again to a dead-end job classification. Despite these setbacks, he continued to receive commendations for his work until May 25, 2018, when he was abruptly escorted out of LACOE offices and later terminated under accusations of violating cash-handling procedures.
Yeoh disputed these charges and successfully appealed his termination. In August 2019, a personnel commission hearing officer recommended his reinstatement with back pay minus a five-day suspension for contacting coworkers during the investigation—an act found to violate specific orders. Despite being reinstated, Yeoh alleged that LACOE continued its retaliatory practices by assigning him undesirable tasks and falsely accusing him of misfeasance.
In November 2020, Yeoh filed a lawsuit against LACOE alleging whistleblower retaliation under Labor Code section 1102.5 and other statutes related to disability discrimination and civil rights violations. However, both his initial complaint and subsequent amended complaints were met with demurrers from LACOE—legal objections asserting that even if all allegations were true, they did not constitute valid legal claims.
The trial court sustained these demurrers without leave to amend on grounds that Yeoh’s claims were barred by statutes of limitations and lacked sufficient factual basis for continuing violations doctrine—a legal principle allowing liability for actions outside statutory limits if connected to ongoing unlawful conduct within those limits. Specifically noting gaps between alleged retaliatory acts spanning several years undermined any claim of reasonable frequency or similarity required under this doctrine.
In affirming the trial court's decision on appeal without leave for further amendments—including adding new causes under title 42 United States Code section 1983—the appellate court concluded there was no reasonable possibility Yeoh could cure defects in his pleadings through additional amendments.
Representing Mark Yeoh was attorney David J. Duchrow from the Law Office of David J. Duchrow while Michael R. White from White & Reed represented LACOE.