Case Background
Daniel Stein worked for Transdev Alternative Services, Inc. as a Waymo Roadside Assistant. Transdev contracted with Waymo to provide autonomous vehicle services. One night in January 2024, Stein’s support vehicle ended up inside a street takeover. Within days, Transdev placed him on leave and then fired him. Stein claimed the company punished him for reporting the danger. Transdev maintained that he broke company policy.
Stein filed suit in Los Angeles County Superior Court on May 1, 2025. Transdev removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on June 9, 2025. Judge Michelle Williams Court presided.
Stein worked as an hourly, nonexempt employee from about August 9, 2023, until January 18, 2024. According to the Complaint, he followed Waymo vehicles in a support vehicle and responded to roadside issues. He alleged that he had to follow exact routes on a company-issued phone. Transdev admitted that he sometimes had to follow specific GPS routes.
Cause
The dispute arose from the night of January 13 and 14, 2024. Stein was driving the support vehicle with co-worker Adam Gardener. According to the Complaint, GPS navigation directed them into a street takeover in downtown Los Angeles. Stein alleged that about 200 parked vehicles and a crowd of rioting pedestrians surrounded them. He described cars doing donuts, fireworks, bonfires, and a heavy police presence. Transdev admitted only that Stein navigated into heavy traffic and could not exit for a limited time.
Stein alleged that he alerted Autonomous Vehicle Operations Supervisor Athena Wong by phone and walkie-talkie. He said he reported that they were surrounded and going offline for safety. He also alleged that he briefly stepped out to photograph the scene and sent the photos to management.
After the crowd dispersed, Gardener refused to resume operations, according to the Complaint. Stein alleged that he reactivated the vehicle while it was parked at a curb. Gardener then challenged Stein’s conduct and escalated the matter to management.
Managers later accused Stein of using his phone while the vehicle was not in park, he alleged. He said in-vehicle camera footage showed the vehicle at 0 MPH. Manager Eric Flores conducted a Record of Discussion on January 15, 2024. Transdev placed Stein on administrative leave by email on January 16. It terminated his employment by email on January 18, 2024.
Injury
Stein’s claimed harm centered on the loss of his job. He did not allege a physical injury from the street takeover. The Complaint alleged that he suffered humiliation, embarrassment, mental anguish, and emotional distress. He also alleged losses in salary, future advancement, bonuses, and benefits.
Damages
Stein sought special damages, unpaid wages, and general damages for emotional distress and mental anguish. He also requested punitive damages, prejudgment interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs. Under section 1102.5, he sought civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation. The Complaint did not state a specific dollar figure.
In its removal notice, Transdev said Stein earned $30.00 per hour when his employment ended. It estimated at least $176,400 in controversy, including about $86,400 in lost wages. Before trial, the Court granted Transdev’s request to try punitive damages in a separate phase.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: Daniel Stein
Counsel for Plaintiff: Larry W. Lee | Kwanporn “Mai” Tulyathan | Kym Kanenaka | Renia Zadourian
Defendant(s): Transdev Alternative Services, Inc.
Counsel for Defendant(s): Allison M. Scott | Brendan A. Melander | Jennifer J. Lee | Carol Barrera [Terminated: 07/15/2026]
Mediator: Michael H Leb
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Claims
Stein brought six causes of action. Four alleged whistleblower retaliation under California Labor Code sections 1102.5, 232.5, 6310, and 6311. He also alleged wrongful termination in violation of public policy and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Stein claimed that his reports disclosed violations of public safety standards, traffic laws, and Cal/OSHA regulations. He alleged that Transdev retaliated within three days by placing him on leave, and later fired him. He also alleged that he refused to proceed with operations under hazardous conditions. According to the Complaint, the cell phone policy violation was a pretext. He alleged that photographic and GPS data showed his vehicle was stationary.
On September 11, 2025, the Court dismissed the emotional distress claim with leave to amend. It denied Transdev’s motion to dismiss on all other counts. The docket does not reflect an amended pleading on that claim.
Defense
Transdev denied all liability. It argued that Stein did not engage in protected activity, complain about unsafe conditions, or refuse to perform work. It said an investigation revealed that Stein violated company policies. Its witness list cited alleged mobile device policy violations during the incident. It also cited Stein exiting WRA vehicle #54 on an active roadway. According to the same filing, Gardener reported Stein’s conduct to the company.
Transdev raised a mixed motive, or same decision, defense under Labor Code section 1102.6. It contended that it would have taken the same action for legitimate reasons. It also argued that workers’ compensation provided the exclusive remedy for any emotional distress claim.
The Court denied Transdev’s motion for summary judgment on June 2, 2026. Before trial, it also refused to exclude CBS News footage of the street takeover.
Jury Verdict
The first trial began on August 17, 2026, and a jury was impaneled the next day. The jury began deliberating on August 24 and sent the Court several notes. On August 25, 2026, the Court declared a mistrial.
A new jury was impaneled on September 8, 2026. Both sides rested on September 10, and the Court denied a motion for directed verdict. On September 11, 2026, the jury returned a verdict for Stein.
On the section 1102.5 claim, jurors found that Stein disclosed violations of public safety standards and traffic laws. The violations also involved occupational safety regulations, including Cal/OSHA regulations. The jury found that his disclosure was a contributing factor in his discharge. It also found that Transdev failed to prove it would have fired Stein anyway for legitimate, independent reasons.
On the section 6310 claim, jurors found that Stein complained to Wong about unsafe working conditions. They found the complaint was a substantial motivating reason for his discharge. On the wrongful termination claim, the jury found that Transdev fired Stein for refusing unsafe work. It also found that Transdev discharged, disciplined, or otherwise discriminated against him for disclosing information about its working conditions. On each claim, the jury found that Stein suffered harm caused by Transdev.
The jury awarded $73,040 for past lost earnings and $137,040 for future lost earnings. It awarded $50,000 for past noneconomic loss and nothing for future noneconomic loss. Compensatory damages totaled $260,080.
The jury also found that Transdev officers, directors, or managing agents acted with malice, oppression, or fraud. In a second phase that day, the jury unanimously awarded $10,000,000 in punitive damages. The total verdict reached $10,260,080. The Court polled the jury.
Post-trial Motions
On September 15, 2026, Stein lodged a proposed order after trial. Transdev filed objections on September 21, 2026. Stein asked the Court to strike those objections the same day. Transdev replied on September 22, 2026.
On October 23, 2026, the Court entered judgment on the special verdict. It awarded Stein $10,260,080, including $260,080 in compensatory damages and $10 million in punitive damages. The Court named Stein the prevailing party. He may seek attorneys’ fees and costs by separate motion. The Court then closed the case. The docket did not reflect a notice of appeal.
Court Documents:
Documents are available for purchase upon request at [email protected]
