Vo v. Technology Credit Union, 108 Cal. App. 5th 632 (2025)
Thomas Vo sued his former employer (TCU) for violations of the FEHA; TCU responded with a motion to compel arbitration. The trial court denied TCU’s motion on the ground that that it was unconscionable due to the arbitrator’s inability to compel prehearing third-party discovery. The Court of Appeal held because there was
Lowry v. Port San Luis Harbor Dist., 109 Cal. App. 5th 56 (2025)
John Lowry was employed as a harbor patrol officer before suffering a permanently disabling on-the-job injury. His treating psychiatrist concluded that Lowry suffered from PTSD as a result of the accident and was not fit to return to work and instead should be “medically retired.” Lowry was subsequently terminated because
Miller v. California Dep’t of Corr. & Rehab., 105 Cal. App. 5th 261 (2024)
Maria Miller worked as a correctional officer at the California Institute for Women before she was injured in a slip-and-fall accident in 2016. After Miller had exhausted her workers’ compensation wage replacement benefits in 2018, the Department placed her on an unpaid leave of absence. When the Department subsequently
Vines v. O’Reilly Auto Enterprises, LLC, 2024 WL 1751760 (Cal. Ct. App. 2024)
Renee Vines filed an action against his former employer alleging discrimination and harassment under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) based on his race and age; that he was retaliated against when he was wrongfully terminated after he complained about the discrimination and harassment; and that his employer failed to prevent
Neeble-Diamond v. Hotel Cal. By the Sea, LLC, 99 Cal. App. 5th 551 (2024)
Amanda Neeble-Diamond sued her employer for violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), but after a jury concluded she was an independent contractor rather than an employee, the trial court entered judgment in favor of the employer (Hotel California). Hotel California then filed a motion for attorney’s fees
Hittle v. City of Stockton, 76 F.4th 877 (9th Cir. 2023)
Ronald Hittle served as the City’s Fire Chief before he was fired (following an investigation by an outside investigator) because he lacked effectiveness and judgment in his ongoing leadership of the Fire Department; used City time and a City vehicle to attend a religious event and approved on-duty attendance of other Fire Department
The Ninth Circuit certified to the California Supreme Court the question of whether FEHA’s definition of “employer” extends to corporate agents of the employer such as a company that conducts preemployment medical screenings. In this putative class action, plaintiffs allege that their employment offers were conditioned upon their completion of pre-employment
Elizabeth Castelo sued her former employer Xceed Financial Credit Union for wrongful termination and age discrimination in violation of FEHA. After the parties stipulated to binding arbitration, the arbitrator granted summary judgment to Xceed based on a release that Castelo signed after she was notified of the termination decision but before her