A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge dismissed a nearly five-year-long wrongful termination, harassment and retaliation lawsuit brought by former Inglewood executive assistant, Melanie McDade-Dickens, against Mayor James T. Butts Jr. and the city. The dismissal ended a long-running, high-profile dispute regarding her 2019 dismissal.

McDade-Dickens, a onetime top-paid city staffer earning more than $340,000 in total compensation in 2018, alleged she was placed on leave and later fired in retaliation for ending a secret romantic relationship with the mayor, and that she suffered harassment and career damage after the breakup.

The city countered that she was terminated for cause following an internal investigation that accused her of pressuring a subordinate to co-sign a home loan, altering financial documents, lying about a hardship withdrawal, and trying to interfere with the probe. The alleged interference included texts that appeared to direct a staffer to delete an altered pay stub.

The case deteriorated after years of procedural problems, with the judge throwing out the sexual harassment claim as time-barred. The judge later imposed more than $217,000 in monetary sanctions and evidentiary sanctions after finding perjury, failure to produce documents, and destruction of key evidence, which prevented the plaintiff from introducing new proof to support her claims.

After McDade-Dickens, then representing herself, failed to file an opposition to the city's summary judgment motion and unsuccessfully sought more time, citing lack of counsel and personal hardships, Judge Lia Martin granted summary judgment on November 06, 2025, vacated the upcoming trial date, and dismissed all remaining claims in their entirety, effectively closing the case. This left the city with nearly $3 million in legal costs but freed the mayor of ongoing litigation as he looks toward reelection.

Source: https://www.dailybreeze.com/2025/11/18/lawsuit-from-inglewood-mayors-ex-girlfriend-assistant-thrown-out-after-4-years-2/

Commentary

In the above matter, the mayor denied the relationship and claimed the accuser was terminated "for cause"; however, the suit persisted for three years.

This litigation gives perspective to always keeping workplace relationships professional to avoid inferences of impropriety, especially when managers or supervisors have authority over the employees they supervise.

Personal romantic relationships in these circumstances create conflicts of interest, undermine confidence in decisions, and can lead to costly litigation if an adverse action later occurs, even when the organization ultimately prevails in court.

Managers should view this behavior not only as a legal risk, creating perceptions of favoritism, and casting doubt on the credibility of discipline, promotions, and evaluations, but also as a negative influence on team morale.

When a manager or supervisor has a romantic relationship with someone who directly reports to them, every employment decision touching that employee can be challenged as biased or retaliatory, regardless of the manager's intent. Other employees may claim unfair treatment or hostile environment, alleging that the relationship influenced pay, scheduling, or opportunities.

Because managers and supervisor control assignments, evaluations, and discipline, the subordinate's "consent" to the relationship may be questioned later, especially if the relationship ends badly and complaints follow. Even if a court ultimately rejects the claims, investigations, discovery, and litigation can consume years and generate substantial defense costs.

The final takeaway is that managers and supervisors must model professional boundaries and avoid romantic relationships with anyone they supervise or whose work conditions they influence. If a relationship develops despite these expectations, the manager should immediately disclose it to HR or higher leadership so the organization can evaluate conflicts and take corrective steps, such as transfers or changes in supervisory responsibility.