Well, we’re going to have the answer to that question soon from the California Supreme Court. The case is entitled Salas v. Sierra Chemical (Case Number S196558). The issue in Salas is whether an employee’s claims for discrimination under California’s FEHA can be dismissed on grounds of “after-acquired evidence”…
In Muniz v. United Parcel Services, Inc., the Ninth Circuit ruled that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding the prevailing plaintiff $697,972 in attorneys’ fees where the jury awarded her only $27,280 in damages on a single FEHA claim. UPS brought the appeal and…
On February 21, 2013, the California Court of Appeal held in Sanchez v. Swissport, Inc. held that an employer may be required to provide additional leave as a “reasonable accommodation” beyond the 4 month maximum pregnancy disability leave (“PDL”) required by California law. The Facts of the Case Employee Sanchez…
In Harris v. City of Santa Monica, the CA Supreme Court ruled that an employer could be liable under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) if that employer took “adverse employment action” against an employee and unlawful discrimination was a “substantial factor motivating” that action. However, the Court…