California Court of Appeal

In a case alleging sexual orientation discrimination and retaliation, orders granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict and new trial are reversed as the court erred in granting defendants' motions: 1) for JNOV on the ground there was insufficient evidence of adverse employment action, and on the ground a supervisor cannot be held liable for retaliation under FEHA; 2) for new trial on the ground that there was insufficient evidence of adverse employment action as that term was defined in McRae I and as the jury was not instructed on adverse employment action in accordance with McRae I; and 3) for new trial on the ground of excessive damages in that the court failed to specify its reasons;

Appellate Information

• Decided 02/05/2007
• Published 02/05/2007

Judges

• BENKE, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Toothacre & Toothacre LLP, Scott H. Toothacre and Rod M. Toothacre for Plaintiff and Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Horvitz & Levy LLP, Barry R. Levy and Nina E. Scholtz, Encino;  Wilson, Petty, Kosmo & Turner LLP, Regina A. Petty, Michael S. Kalt and Jessica A. Chasin, San Diego, for Defendants and Respondents.