SALAZAR v. DIVERSIFIED PARATRANSIT, INC., B142840, B144243
The anti-harassment portions of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Government Code sections 12940(j),(1) and (k), do not create employer liability when a non-employee client or customer sexually harasses an employee.
- Decided 10/28/2002
- Published 10/28/2002
- California Court of Appeal
- For Appellant:
- Wiezorek, Rice & Dieffenbach and Susan Graham Lovelace; Wiezorek & Rice and Steven C. Rice, Long Beach, for Plaintiff and Appellant., Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Richard M. Frank, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Louis Verdugo, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Catherine Z. Ysrael and Suzanne M. Ambrose, Deputy Attorneys General, for Attorney General, Bill Lockyer as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Appellant., Law Offices of Jeffrey K. Winikow, Jeffrey K. Winikow, Los Angeles; Bornn & Surls and Nancy Bornn, Santa Monica, for California Employment Lawyers Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Appellant., Orren & Orren and Tyna Thall Orren, Pasadena, for Janis Adams as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Appellant.
- For Appellees:
- Graves & King, Patrick L. Graves, Harvey W. Wimer III, Riverside and Dennis J. Mahoney, San Bernardino, for Defendants and Respondents., Lewis, D'Amato, Brisbois & Bisgaard and Christopher D. Lockwood, San Bernardino, for California Manufacturers and Technology Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Respondents., Jones Day and Elwood Lui, San Francisco, for Los Angeles Unified School District as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Respondents.