An attorney brought on to spur action in a 3-year-old lawsuit had one word for what his side was seeking at a mediation conference next week: “accountability.”
Los Angeles Police Department Officer Anna Vardanian’s lawsuit against her employer alleges that after her now ex-husband showed intimate photos of her to their coworkers, she reported the incident and continued to be harassed and retaliated against at work, while only her husband realized any consequences.
There have been two developments that could bring Vardanian’s quest for justice closer before the end of the year: A Stevenson Ranch firm has been brought on to prompt the police agency to produce long-sought evidence; and a stipulated trial schedule was created for June, with some caveats.
Caleb Miller of Miller Wilmers, one of the new attorneys added to the case, said he didn’t anticipate a resolution at a mediation hearing set for next week.
He didn’t feel the law enforcement agency had been taking the lawsuit seriously enough, adding he has yet to have a chance at questioning two of the named officers in the complaint.
“Essentially, what has happened is the city (of L.A.) has prolonged any discovery efforts. They’re refusing to produce witnesses and trying to delay this case as long as they possibly can,” Miller said in a phone interview Tuesday. “So, we were brought in to sort of prevent that from happening and get them to produce these witnesses. They haven’t even produced the officers who received the salacious photos and videos. They’ve been hiding everybody.”
The LAPD Media Department did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday. A voicemail left with the city’s attorney on the case, Susan Swingle, was not immediately returned Tuesday.
Vardanian’s previous counsel questioned whether the LAPD was engaging in “gamesmanship” in the continued delays of depositions, which were almost the subject of another hearing earlier this year.
Vardanian filed for divorce after finding out in January 2022 that her then-husband, Brady Lamas, had circulated nude photos of her to several of their coworkers, according to Lamas’ complaint.
Her ex-husband, Brady Lamas, pleaded no contest in March 2024 to one count of the state’s revenge-porn law, in response to her discovery and reporting the incident to the authorities. He was stripped of his officer certification, which is needed to serve on a police force in California, and ordered to attend a program for sexual addiction and community service at his sentencing.
In sworn statements, Officer Anna Lamas said she was “horrified” Jan. 30, 2022, when she went to record a message for her now ex-husband on his phone and discovered the alleged breach of trust.
Lamas’ suit claims she told her supervisor right away, who helped her file a report with Internal Affairs, which booked her phone as evidence. But when Anna Lamas returned to work about two weeks later, two of her fellow officers listed in the complaint “would routinely see plaintiff and subject her to sexual harassment.”
On May 1, both sides signed a stipulated order setting a July trial schedule for the allegations of sexual harassment, retaliation, a violation of whistleblower laws and a failure to take reasonable steps to prevent harassment.
Both sides had also agreed then to attempt mediation, with an anticipation of trial, per Judge Virginia Keeny’s order from that hearing.
“Based on the mediator’s and parties’ schedules, the parties anticipate that the mediation will take place on or about May 18, 2026, before (Ret.) Judge Tim McCoy (JAMS),” according to the order from Judge Virginia Keeny. “Based on the foregoing, good cause exists to continue the trial in this action.” That was later rescheduled for May 26, per Miller.
The trial previously was scheduled for May, but previous filings by LAPD’s attorneys indicated that, due to a personal injury, that schedule would not be possible. After two years of trying, the plaintiff’’s attorney questioned whether the latest delays were part of a strategy.
At the May 1 hearing, a stipulated trial schedule was ordered for a final status conference on July 2.
However, Keeny also noted there had been delays from both sides, and left a window open for one more delay of two to four months, should that be necessary at the July hearing.
