California Court of Appeal

Judgment for plaintiff-employee in an action alleging hostile work environment sexual harassment is affirmed but modified, where: 1) substantial evidence supports the verdict because a heterosexual male is subjected to harassment because of sex under the FEHA when attacks on his heterosexual identity are used as a tool of harassment in the workplace, irrespective of whether the attacks are motivated by sexual desire or interest; 2) defendant waived or forfeited his claim that the special verdict was fatally defective because it had failed to object before the jury was discharged; 3) a defective special verdict form is subject to harmless error analysis, and here, any error was harmless; 4) the evidence is insufficient to support the award of economic damage so plaintiff's total recovery is reduced from $160,000 to $150,000; and 5) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in calculating the attorney fee award for plaintiff.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/13/2014
• Published 01/13/2014

Judges

• YEGAN

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel