It was another difficult day in court for former parking control officer Elias Georgopoulos in his case against the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, as the defense, once again, took aim at the plaintiff.
Georgopoulos accuses the SFMTA, where he worked for 22 years, of fostering an environment in which he was regularly harassed and discriminated against, without repercussions. Georgopoulos, who is Latino, alleges that he was bullied in the office for his height and race, and that he was called a “spic” by Shawn McCormick, the director of parking enforcement. McCormick denies ever using that word.
Yesterday, multiple former SFMTA coworkers alleged that, in fact, Georgopoulos himself was a bully who harassed other parking-enforcement officers for years, regularly yelled at subordinates, and targeted Black employees. This, they said, also occurred with no repercussions. Some testified that they were scared of him.
Today, the defense steered away from the question of who, really, was a bully at the SFMTA parking enforcement office, and instead on whether Georgopoulos was an employee who followed the rules, and one who would work there for longer than nine more years.
That estimated future tenure was key, because during Tuesday’s court action, city attorneys argued that Georgopoulos’ estimated loss of income was exaggerated. They maintained that he is doing fine already as a mobile notary. This is a job, they pointed out, that he never reported to the SFMTA, despite rules mandating that city employees report second jobs to avoid conflicts of interest.
Though it is hard to imagine what conflict of interest Georgopoulos could acquire as a mobile notary, city attorneys used this evidence to label Georgopoulos a rule-breaker and put his character into question.
“It speaks to his integrity, Your Honor,” said Nancy Harris, a deputy city attorney, when Eduardo Roy, Georgopoulos’ lawyer, protested invoking Georgopoulos’ second job, and complained that it would harm his reputation as a notary.
San Francisco Superior Court Judge Daniel Flores promptly informed Roy that it was the city’s turn to make its case.
As city attorneys brought in one witness after another who testified to Georgopoulos’ income, the rules of reporting a second job, the credibility of his harassment complaints, and even how long he would live, things started to look worse and worse for the plaintiff.
The 51-year-old is hoping to make up for the alleged loss of income and emotional distress he endured at the workplace with, as Roy has specified outside of court, “millions and millions.”
But Casey Colip, an operations manager from Snapdocs, the platform Georgopoulos uses as a mobile notary, says that between 2020 and her most recent data, Georgopoulos made more than $400,000. That belies the plaintiff’s financial expert’s estimate that, based on his current limitations, Georgopoulos could expect to make only about $40,000 a year.
The city’s second financial expert, economist Eric Barnes, estimated that Georgopoulos could live comfortably with the pension he currently receives from the city, which is only a fraction of what he could have received if he had waited to retire until turning 65. But Barnes said that with Georgopoulos’ physical limitations (he has rheumatoid arthritis), he would more likely retire five years before that — and, statistically, likely die at 78.
Georgopoulos, who for much of his 10 days in court thus far has animatedly whispered through testimony to his lawyer, remained silent, gazing down at his notepad.
In Roy’s opening statements, he told the jury that Georgopoulos, in fact, did not plan to die at 78. Rather, he plans to live long enough to see his granddaughter, who is a baby, go to Stanford University — and, presumably some years after that, hold his great-grandchild. His expert, Dan Quintero, who is the son of a partner at Roy’s law firm, used IRS data instead to predict that Georgopoulos would live much longer. Barnes used data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This data, he testified on Tuesday, is more credible.
Patience wears thin in court
Roy, who suffered from an was ill last month before the judge declared a mistrial, has exhibited the behavior of a man who is still very much under the weather this week. Today, he often asked witnesses the same question multiple times, accidentally called witnesses by the wrong name and spent much of his time sifting through evidence as both parties quarreled over who had the right documents, all while alternating between sipping from a bottle of NyQuil and a Celsius energy drink.
Virginia Harmon, who worked for the SFMTA’s Equal Employment Opportunity office during Georgopoulos’ tenure as a senior parking enforcement officer, was asked by Roy three separate times to clarify that she, in fact, did not work for the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. With each clarification, Harmon grew more and more frustrated with Roy’s questioning.
During Harmon’s testimony, she stated that her job was to facilitate complaints sent to her office, determine if the complaint fell under discrimination, harassment, or retaliation, and forward complaints to management. Harmon testified that she has received complaints from Georgopoulos; one of them was that he was called “short” by a coworker. She testified that, while being called short was a policy violation, it was not an EEO Complaint, and could be handled by management.
She testified that she did, however, investigate an incident in which Georgopoulos reported an SFMTA coworker shouted, “English only!” in his direction while he was speaking in Spanish with a colleague. The outcome of this investigation was not shared on Tuesday.
Georgopoulos has leveled much more serious allegations of harassment, particularly that, in addition to allegedly being called a “spic,” he was called a “crippled faggot.” But Harmon testified that she did not recall receiving that complaint.
City attorneys have one more day to present their evidence before both parties will ostensibly deliver closing statements on Thursday. And, following that, the jury heads into deliberations.
Diary of a mismanagement.
I’ve watched my brother endure unfair treatment from the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) for well over a decade—dating as far back as 2008. What started as subtle harassment eventually escalated into a persistent campaign of retaliation and discrimination. As his sibling, I’ve witnessed firsthand how these experiences have affected him—not just professionally, but personally.
Elias has always been a bright, magnetic presence—someone people are drawn to because of his humor, loyalty, and huge heart. He’s the kind of person who can bring people together, make you feel seen, and lighten the mood with a single joke. But over the years, especially after the mistreatment at work became more severe, I noticed a change. He became more withdrawn, more cautious. The light in him dimmed. He stopped hanging out as much. He started to carry the weight of what SFMTA was putting him through—weight no one should have to bear alone.
That said, one thing has never changed: Elias’s unwavering sense of fairness and integrity. He’s always stood up for what’s right, even when it wasn’t easy. He’s not afraid to speak out when he sees wrongdoing—and that’s exactly what he’s doing now as the plaintiff in his FEHA case against the SFMTA. He’s not a bully. He’s not discriminatory. He’s someone who was targeted for daring to stand up against discrimination and retaliation, and now the agency is trying to distort the truth to cover their tracks.
My brother is—and always has been—a devoted husband, a caring uncle, a phenomenal big brother, and a friend to so many. He served the City and County of San Francisco for 24 years with pride and professionalism. The way SFMTA is attempting to destroy his reputation to escape accountability is beyond shameful.
I know who Elias is. Our family knows. His friends, community, and colleagues know. He is not the villain they’re trying to make him out to be. He is the one who was wronged, and now he’s finally standing up not just for himself, but for anyone who’s ever been mistreated and silenced by a system that was supposed to protect them.
I love you, brother. You are not alone in this fight.