Failure to Engage Interactive Process

Useful Resources for Disability Discrimination – Failure to Engage Interactive Process

Recent Rulings on Disability Discrimination – Failure to Engage Interactive Process

226-250 of 1242 results

LAUREN WALTERS VS CHARLES D. SMITH, ET AL.

to engage in the interactive process; and (11) violation of California Labor Code, Section 1102.5.

  • Hearing

    Jul 27, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

ZARAGOZA-SALCIDO VS. CC SHERIFF

Fourth Cause of Action (Failure to Engage in Interactive Process) It is unlawful for an employer “to fail to engage in a timely, good faith, interactive process with the employee ... to determine effective reasonable accommodations, if any, in response to a request for reasonable accommodation by an employee or applicant with a known physical or mental disability or known medical condition.” (Govt. Code § 12940(n).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 24, 2020

ADAN MOTA VS ALPERT & ALPERT IRON & METAL, INC.

(“Defendant”) alleging causes of action for (1) Disability Discrimination under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), (2) Failure to Accommodate under FEHA, (3) Failure to Engage in the Interactive Process under FEHA, (4) Failure to Prevent Discrimination under FEHA, (5) Retaliation under FEHA, and (6) Wrongful Termination in violation of public policy. On April 9, 2020, Defendant filed the instant motion to compel arbitration. On April 20, 2020, Plaintiff filed his opposition.

  • Hearing

    Jul 24, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

CYNTHIA SEWAK V. EDWARD STAHL, ET AL.

Sewak asserts causes of action against Pharmaca and Stahl for: (1) negligence (against Stahl); (2) disability-based discrimination (against Pharmaca); (3) failure to provide reasonable accommodation (against Pharmaca); (4) failure to engage in interactive process (against Pharmaca); (5) wrongful termination under Tameny (against Pharmaca); and (6) retaliation (against Pharmaca).

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

DEYRA SALAZAR VS CATALINA CARPET MILLS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

BACKGROUND: On October 10, 2019, Plaintiff Deyra Salazar commenced this action against Defendants Catalina Carpet Mills, Inc. and BaronHR, LLC for (1) medical condition/disability discrimination; (2) failure to provide reasonable accommodation; (3) failure to engage in good faith interactive process; (4) retaliation; and (5) wrongful termination in violation of public policy.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

KATY M SETOODEH VS SAINT JOHNS MULTISPECIALTY MEDICAL GROUP, INC., DBA DOCTORS OF ST JOHNS MEDICAL GROUP, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

Plaintiff’s Complaint alleged five causes of action against each of the Defendants: (1) discrimination based on disability in violation of the Fair Housing Employment Act (“FEHA”), (2) failure to accommodate disability in violation of the FEHA, (3) failure to engage in the interactive process in violation of the FEHA, (4) failure to take all reasonable steps to prevent discrimination and retaliation in violation of the FEHA, (5) retaliation in violation of the FEHA.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

PRINCESS OBIENU VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES

On September 17, 2019, Plaintiff Princess Obienu (Plaintiff) filed suit against the County of Los Angeles Department of Health Services (Defendant), alleging: (1) race/national origin discrimination; (2) disability discrimination; (3) failure to accommodate disability; (4) failure to engage in the interactive process; (5) violation of the California Family Rights Act (CFRA); (6) violation of the CFRA – Interference with Family Leave Rights; (7) violation of CFRA – retaliation; (8) failure to prevent/correct

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

MARIA GUADALUPE MARTINEZ VS PHARMAVITE LLC

Failure to Engage in the Interactive Process. The court finds there is a genuine dispute as to whether the parties engaged in an interactive process regarding the requested accommodation and whether the parties participated in good faith in that process. Disability Discrimination and Retaliation. The court finds there is a genuine dispute as to whether Plaintiff suffered an adverse action and whether Plaintiff resigned or Defendant terminated her. Wrongful Termination.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

DEYRA SALAZAR VS CATALINA CARPET MILLS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

BACKGROUND: On October 10, 2019, Plaintiff Deyra Salazar commenced this action against Defendants Catalina Carpet Mills, Inc. and BaronHR, LLC for (1) medical condition/disability discrimination; (2) failure to provide reasonable accommodation; (3) failure to engage in good faith interactive process; (4) retaliation; and (5) wrongful termination in violation of public policy.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

LISDAILIS RODRIGUEZ, ET AL. VS JOSE'S THE JUICE BAR MEXICAN GILL, A BUSINESS ENTITY FORM UNKNOWN, ET AL.

Discussion Prior Demurrers On January 7, 2020, this court ruled on the parties’ respective demurrers to the others’ complaint or cross-complaint: Defendants’ demurrer to the Complaint: 12th[1] (discrimination), 13th (failure to accommodate) and 14th (failure to engage in interactive process) causes of action: Sustained with leave to amend. 17th (hostile work environment) cause of action: Sustained without leave to amend. 15th (sexual harassment), 16th (failure to prevent), 18th (IIED), 20 (constructive

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

MELISSA MARTINEZ VS L A HARDWOOD FLOORING INC ET AL

“To prevail on a claim under section 12940, subdivision (n) for failure to engage in the interactive process, an employee must identify a reasonable accommodation that would have been available at the time of the interactive process should have occurred.

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

TOMAS MORALES VS SANAZ FABRICS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

On June 7, 2019, Plaintiff commenced this action against Defendant for (1) failure to pay wages; (2) failure to pay minimum wages; (3) failure to pay overtime compensation; (4) failure to provide meal and rest periods; (5) failure to provide itemized wage statements; (6) waiting time penalties; (7) unfair competition; (8) discrimination; (9) retaliation; (10) failure to prevent discrimination and retaliation; (11) failure to provide reasonable accommodations; (12) failure to engage in a good faith interactive

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

MELISSA MARTINEZ VS L A HARDWOOD FLOORING INC ET AL

.; (6) failure to engage if a good faith interactive process in violation of California Government Code, Section 12940 et seq.; (7) declaratory judgment; (8) wrongful termination in violation [sic] the public policy of the State of California; (9) failure to pay wages due pursuant to California Labor Code, Sections 201, 1182.12, 1194, and 1194.2; (10) failure to provide meal and rest breaks in violation of California Labor Code, Sections 226.7 and 512; (11) failure to provide itemized wage statements in violation

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

JANE DOE, ET AL. VS EMPLOYERS HR, LLC, ET AL.

to engage in the interactive process.[1] On March 2, 2020, Plaintiffs filed the instant motion for leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ERIKA JACQUEZ VS WALMART, INC., ET AL.

Plaintiff filed the operative Complaint, alleging 10 causes of action: (1) discrimination on the basis of disability in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), (2) harassment on the basis of disability in violation of the FEHA, (3) failure to provide reasonable accommodation in violation of the FEHA, (4) failure to engage in the interactive process, (5) retaliation for engaging in a protected activity in violation of the FEHA, (6) violation of Labor Code § 1102.5, (7) violation of Labor Code

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

RAMON SANTACRUZ VS CAESARSTONE USA, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

.; Failure to Engage in a Good Faith Interactive Process in Violation of Gov’t Code §§ 12940, et seq.; Declaratory Judgment; and Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy. Plaintiff moves to quash the deposition subpoena for production of business records served on Select Staffing, Inc. on March 2, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Jul 20, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

MARIA DIWA VS CASA COLINA HOSPITAL AND CENTERS FOR HEALTHCARE, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

.; (5) failure to accommodate; (6) failure to engage in the interactive process; (7) retaliation in violation of California Government Code, Section 12940 et seq.; (8) failure to prevent discrimination and retaliation; and (9) wrongful termination in violation of public policy. Plaintiff filed a motion for an order granting Plaintiff leave to file a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). Plaintiff’s motion is unopposed.

  • Hearing

    Jul 20, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

KRISTEN JONES VS JL REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CORP., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

.; (5) failure to engage in a good faith interactive process in violation of California Government Code, Section 12940 et seq.; (6) declaratory judgment; (7) denial of and discrimination based upon the use of sick leave; and (8) wrongful termination in violation of the public policy of the State of California. The Current Motions to Quash Plaintiff filed three motions.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

SERGIO DELGADILLO VS AIDS PROJECT LOS ANGELES, APLA HEALTH & WELLNESS, DOING BUSINESS AS APLA HEALTH

Defendant does not demur to the 1st (disability discrimination [FEHA]), 2nd (failure to reasonably accommodate [FEHA]), 3rd (failure to engage in a good faith interactive process [FEHA]), 6th (harassment [FEHA]), 7th (retaliation [FEHA]), and 8th (failure to prevent discrimination, harassment, and retaliation) causes of action. On October 18, 2019, Plaintiff filed his initial complaint in the instant action, in which he alleged the same eight causes of action against Defendant as in the FAC.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

SUNNY GALLO VS WOOD RANCH USA, INC.

On January 6, 2020, Plaintiff, therefore, filed this action against Defendant alleging nine causes of action: C/A 1: Discrimination in Violation of FEHA C/A 2: Failure to Prevent Discrimination in Violation of FEHA C/A 3: Harassment in Violation of FEHA C/A 4: Failure to Prevent Harassment in Violation of FEHA C/A 5: Retaliation in Violation of FEHA C/A 6: Labor Code §§ 98.6 and 1102.5 C/A 7: Failure to Engage in Interactive Process C/A 8: Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy C/A 9: Intentional

  • Hearing

    Jul 16, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

VINCENT BERRY VS EVERPORT TERMINAL SERVICES, INC.

Third and Fourth Causes of Action: Failure to provide reasonable accommodations, failure to engage in interactive process Govt. Code §12940(m) makes it unlawful for “an employer . . . to fail to make reasonable accommodation for the known . . . disability of an . . . employee.”

  • Hearing

    Jul 15, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

KRISTEN JONES VS JL REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CORP., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

.; (5) failure to engage in a good faith interactive process in violation of California Government Code, Section 12940 et seq.; (6) declaratory judgment; (7) denial of and discrimination based upon the use of sick leave; and (8) wrongful termination in violation of the public policy of the State of California. The Current Motion On February 7, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion to quash service of the deposition subpoena for production of business records served by Defendant upon West Builders, Inc.

  • Hearing

    Jul 15, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

CRISTIAN DELGADO BARRERA VS ALBERTSON'S LLC

Plaintiff’s operative Complaint alleges the following causes of action: (1) mental and physical disability discrimination under the Fair Housing and Employment Act (“FEHA”), (2) failure to accommodate disability under the FEHA, (3) failure to engage in an interactive process under the FEHA, (4) “wrongful discharge for exercise of FEHA rights and retaliation”, (5) wrongful termination under the FEHA.

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

CELIA ALEGRIA VS IN-N-OUT BURGERS ET AL

.; (6) failure to engage in a good faith interactive process in violation of California Government Code, Section 12940 et seq.; (7) wrongful termination in violation of public policy; and (8) declaratory judgment. On May 29, 2019, Plaintiff filed a request for dismissal with prejudice as to the entire action and all parties in the action. Dismissal was entered with prejudice on May 29, 2019. On January 22, 2020, Defendant filed a petition to confirm contractual arbitration award.

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

AJA STEEN, AN INDIVIDUAL VS IHS GLOBAL INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION

The Complaint asserts causes of action for (1) disability discrimination, (2) failure to provide reasonable accommodation, (3) failure to engage in the interactive process, (4) failure to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent discrimination and retaliation, (5) retaliation under FEHA, (6) wrongful termination, (7) failure to provide personnel files, and (8) failure to provide payroll files. The Complaint alleges in pertinent part as follows.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

  « first    1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 50     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.