Category Archives: FEHA

California Supreme Court: After-Acquired Evidence and Unclean Hands Are Not Complete Defenses

by Greg Mullanax Posted on June 26, 2014

Just after I posted thoughts on recent unpublished opinions, today the California Supreme Court issued an opinion in which it concluded that the after-acquired evidence and unclean hands doctrines are not complete defenses to FEHA claims, but they do affect … Continue reading →

Posted in After-Acquired Evidence, FEHA, Unclean Hands | Comments Off

Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies? Bring It Up Before Trial!

by Greg Mullanax Posted on June 13, 2014

I sure don’t want to help out defendants in employment law cases, but if you have been sued by a former employee under FEHA, make sure the employee exhausted his/her remedies under FEHA before filing the lawsuit. If the employee … Continue reading →

Posted in Exhaustion of Admin Remedies, FEHA | Comments Off

New in 2014: Sexual Harassment Need Not Be Motivated by Sexual Desire

by Greg Mullanax Posted on January 25, 2014

SB 292 amends FEHA regarding sexual harassment by stating sexual harassment “need not be motivated by sexual desire.” Specifically, California Government Code § 12940(j)(4)(C) was amended to change the existing definition as “harassment because of sex” to include “sexual harassment, … Continue reading →

Posted in FEHA, Sexual Harassment | Leave a comment

Military Members and Veterans’ New FEHA Protections

by Greg Mullanax Posted on December 29, 2013

As I previously wrote here, it will now be a violation of FEHA for covered employers to discriminate against a person because he or she is a member of the military or is a veteran. For your convenience, you can … Continue reading →

Posted in FEHA | Leave a comment

9th Circuit Affirms Large Attorney’s Fee Award on Modest Verdict

by Greg Mullanax Posted on December 6, 2013

Defendants in FEHA cases should be very careful when evaluating whether or not to settle a case, especially when defendant receives a CCP § 998 offer in compromise from plaintiff. This is so because if plaintiff wins anything from the … Continue reading →

Posted in Atty Fees, FEHA | Leave a comment

“Military & Veteran Status” Protections Added to FEHA

by Greg Mullanax Posted on October 11, 2013

Governor Jerry Brown signed into law yesterday AB 556 authored by Assemblyman Rudy Salas (D-Bakersfield) which adds “military and veteran status” as a category of protected classes to FEHA’s employment anti-discrimination protections.

Posted in FEHA | Leave a comment

FEHA Statutes of Limitation: Keep it Simple, Stupid!

by Greg Mullanax Posted on July 19, 2013

We all know the drill: File the DFEH complaint within one year after the alleged unlawful conduct occurred. Then you have one year from the date of the Right-to-Sue letter in which to file a lawsuit. This gets complicated for … Continue reading →

Posted in FEHA, Limitations | Leave a comment

The “I Woulda Fired Him Anyway!” Defense

by Greg Mullanax Posted on February 10, 2013

If an employer fires an employee when unlawful discrimination is a substantial factor motivating the termination, if the employer can show that it would have fired the employee absent the discrimination, the employee gets no damages, backpay or even reinstatement. … Continue reading →

Posted in FEHA, Mixed-Motive | Leave a comment

McDonnell Douglas Burden-Shifting Test: Not for the Jury!

by Greg Mullanax Posted on August 22, 2012

In an unpublished decision in an age discrimination case filed under FEHA, California’s Second District Court of Appeals just affirmed what most employment law attorneys already know: the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting test is to be used by the court in … Continue reading →

Posted in Age Discrimination, Cases to Avoid, FEHA | Leave a comment

Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies – OUCH!

by Greg Mullanax Posted on February 25, 2012

Here’s an embarrassing case for plaintiff’s attorney: This is a case where plaintiff failed to exhaust her administrative remedies under FEHA by obtaining her right-to-sue letter before filing her lawsuit. Things are made worse after defendant files the expected demurrer: … Continue reading →

Posted in 2012, FEHA | Leave a comment

The FEHA Blog

Commentary on the FEHA – the California Fair Employment and Housing Act – from An Employee Rights Attorney's Point of View

Category Archives: FEHA

California Supreme Court: After-Acquired Evidence and Unclean Hands Are Not Complete Defenses

Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies? Bring It Up Before Trial!

New in 2014: Sexual Harassment Need Not Be Motivated by Sexual Desire

Military Members and Veterans’ New FEHA Protections

9th Circuit Affirms Large Attorney’s Fee Award on Modest Verdict

“Military & Veteran Status” Protections Added to FEHA

FEHA Statutes of Limitation: Keep it Simple, Stupid!

The “I Woulda Fired Him Anyway!” Defense

McDonnell Douglas Burden-Shifting Test: Not for the Jury!

Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies – OUCH!

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Meta