California Court of Appeal

Because section 12940(m) of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), defining the duty to make reasonable accommodation, is markedly different from 42 U.S.C. section 1211, an interpretive statement of the EEOC on the duty to accommodate under the ADA should not be used to interpret the FEHA; plaintiff adequately pled that defendant engaged in an unlawful employment practice under FEHA section 12940(m), thus, the trial court erred in sustaining defendant's demurrer without leave to amend.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/02/2002
• Published 04/02/2002

Judges

• SIMS, Acting P.J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
•  John R. Hargreaves, for Plaintiff and Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Jacob Appelsmith, Lead Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Alicia M.B. Fowler, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, A. Kay Lauterbach, Deputy Attorney General, for Defendants and Respondents.