Thibodeau v. ADT Security Service

Clayton Del Thibodeau (plaintiff) was employed at ADT Security Service (ADT) (defendant) as a high-volume sales representative. Thibodeau was expected to meet a certain monthly sales quota of security systems sold. Thibodeau did not meet this quota in June 2015 and was given a written warning on July 1. On July 22, Thibodeau complained to an ADT official via letter about management practices in the San Diego office that Thibodeau thought were unethical, and he was interviewed about these issues in July and August. Thibodeau failed to meet his sales quotas for August and September and was written up for this failure on September 29. Three days later, Thibodeau resigned. After Thibodeau resigned, he sued ADT, alleging nine causes of action, including a claim alleging that ADT retaliated against him for whistleblowing. Thibodeau alleged that the retaliation was in response to his complaints regarding unethical practices, which included the practice of crumpling paper to obscure the name of ADT when leaving voicemails in order to generate more returned calls, the practice of telling customers that they could have a free security system in exchange for placing an ADT sign in their yards while initially omitting the fact that the customer would have to pay for two years of service in order to receive the free system, and the like. Thibodeau alleged that his complaints were the reason that he was written up and the reason he was denied a promotion and a transfer, among other adverse actions. ADT moved for partial summary judgment on Thibodeau’s whistleblowing claim, alleging that Thibodeau had not demonstrated that he engaged in a protected activity as required under California’s whistleblowing statute.