A woman has dropped her lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Los Angeles in which she alleged she was wrongfully terminated from her job as director of pre-planning for Catholic cemeteries in 2023 over an allegation that she violated her employer’s anti-nepotism policy by failing to report that she was supervising her niece-in-law.
Paula Rathgaber-Gomez’s Los Angeles Superior Court lawsuit alleged that she had told management about the supervisory relationship but still lost her job, even though the nepotism rule applied only to immediate family members. The plaintiff also alleged her pension would have vested 70 days after her termination.
On Friday, Rathgaber-Gomez’s attorneys filed court papers with Judge Dean J. Kitchens asking that the plaintiff’s case be dismissed “with prejudice,” meaning it cannot be reinstated. The court papers do not state whether a settlement was reached or whether Rathgaber-Gomez decided not to pursue the case for other reasons.
The original suit was filed in December 2024, with amended versions filed in March 2025 and again three months later. The latter two complaints alleged wrongful termination, retaliation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
In previous court papers, archdiocese attorneys denied Rathgaber-Gomez’s allegations, said her claims were barred by the statute of limitations and maintained that any actions taken regarding the plaintiff were based on “legitimate non-retaliatory reasons.”
According to the suit, the archdiocese has a “vague” anti-nepotism policy stating that supervision of an immediate family member may create a conflict of interest. Rathgaber-Gomez opposed the way the rule was being applied to two employees whom the archdiocese allegedly was trying to terminate, despite the fact that they were not immediate family members, the suit stated.
After Rathgaber-Gomez filed a complaint on behalf of the two co-workers, they were separated but not fired, the suit stated. However, in December 2022, the plaintiff was called to a meeting with human resources and accused of violating the same anti-nepotism policy by supervising her niece-in-law, who also was not an immediate family member, according to the suit.
Rathgaber-Gomez was fired a month later and told she should have disclosed her relationship with her niece-in-law, which the plaintiff alleged she had done when the woman was hired four years earlier.
Rathgaber-Gomez contended she lost her job for speaking out against what she believed were discriminatory workplace practices.