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

Boston v. Penny Lane Centers, Inc., 170 Cal. App. 4th 936 (2009)

LaToya Boston worked as a therapist and treatment coordinator for Penny Lane, a social services agency that operates group homes for juveniles and offers therapy for children and families. When Boston was first hired, Penny Lane maintained staffing ratios of one staff member for every three clients, but in time the number

Kotla v. The Regents of the Univ. of Cal., 115 Cal. App. 4th 283 (2004)

Dee Kotla, a former computer support technician, sued the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (the Lab) for retaliation under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) after she testified at a deposition in support of another employee’s claim of sexual harassment. The Lab contended that it had terminated Kotla’s employment as

Kalaba v. Gray, 95 Cal. App. 4th 1416 (2002)

In this medical malpractice case, plaintiff failed to designate by name and address any of her past or present treating physicians. When the trial commenced, plaintiff identified several of her treating physicians whom she intended to call as expert witnesses. The trial court sustained defendant’s objection to plaintiff’s calling any of the treating physicians who