A newly enacted, under-the-radar statute in California could undermine efforts by employers to challenge the expert opinion testimony regarding alleged emotional distress offered by employees at trial.
In many if not most employment trials, the employee’s lawyer offers the expert testimony of a psychiatrist/psychologist (paid for by the plaintiff) who tells the jury about the existence and extent of the emotional distress the employee allegedly
We invite you to review our newly-posted March 2023 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:
Lin v. Kaiser Found. Hosps., 2023 WL 2202544 (Cal. Ct. App. 2023)
Suchin Lin received favorable performance evaluations as an IT Engineer at Kaiser before the decision was made to eliminate her position. Before Lin was informed of the elimination of her position, she fell in the workplace and suffered an injury to her shoulder, which resulted in her doctor placing her on modified
Lopez v. La Casa de Las Madres, 2023 WL 2534998 (Cal. Ct. App. 2023)
Gabriela Lopez worked as shelter manager for a non-profit organization that provides services to women and children who are victims of domestic violence. In September 2016, Lopez gave birth to a child; by December 17, 2016, Lopez had received the full four months of pregnancy-disability leave required by statute, including
Atalla v. Rite Aid Corp., 2023 WL 2521909 (Cal. Ct. App. 2023)
Hanin Atalla and Erik Lund had a social relationship and became “close friends” before Atalla began working at Rite Aid where Lund worked as a district manager/district leader. Atalla and her husband socialized with Lund and his wife, and Atalla and Lund exchanged hundreds of texts; joked with one another in those
As we recently reported, California juries continue to award massive verdicts to employees with alarming regularity. And, just in time for the holidays, a Los Angeles Superior Court jury upped the ante on Thursday, handing a fired insurance company executive a verdict totaling $155.4 million – including $150 million in punitive damages.
Plaintiff Andrew Rudnicki worked for Farmers Insurance Exchange as a senior executive
Sumner v. Simpson Univ., 27 Cal. App. 5th 577 (2018)
Sarah Sumner was the dean of the A.W. Tozer Theological Seminary and was employed pursuant to a written employment agreement. Her employment was terminated by Robin Dummer in his capacity as acting provost of the university on the ground that Sumner had been insubordinate. Sumner sued, alleging breach of contract, defamation, invasion of
Caldera v. California Department of Corr. & Rehab., 25 Cal. App. 5th 31 (2018)
Augustine Caldera is a correctional officer at a state prison who stutters when he speaks. Caldera alleged that the prison’s employees, including a supervisor, “mocked and mimicked” his stutter at least a dozen times over a period of two years. Caldera sued the CDCR for disability harassment, failure to
Hurley v. California Dep’t of Parks & Recreation, 2018 WL 989506 (Cal. Ct. App. 2018)
Delane Hurley worked as a staff services analyst who sued her employer, the Department of Parks & Recreation (“DPR”), and her former supervisor Leda Seals for harassment based on sex and sexual orientation in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), invasion of privacy, violation of the
As regular readers of this blog know, it has been a busy summer for employment-related legislation in the California Legislature (see here and here). Yet of all the bills currently wending their way through the legislative process, none would affect California employment law more than Senate Bill 655. If enacted, SB 655 would modify the rule set forth in the California Supreme Court’s recent