What is Failure to Prevent Discrimination and Harassment?

Failure to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent discrimination and harassment is a “separate actionable tort enforceable upon the establishment of the usual tort elements of duty of care, breach of duty (a negligent act or omission), causation, and damages.” Dickson v. Burke Williams, Inc. (2015) 234 Cal. App. 4th 1307, 1313.

The Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) makes it unlawful for an employer “to fail to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent discrimination and harassment from occurring.” Govt. Code § 12940(k); Scotch v. Art Inst. of California-Orange Cnty., Inc. (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 986, 1003 (citing the old Govt. Code § 12940(h)). Reasonable steps necessary to prevent discrimination include prompt investigation of discrimination claims, establishment and promulgation of antidiscrimination policies, and implementation of effective procedures to handle discrimination complaints. Cal. Fair Employment and Housing Commission v. Gemini Alum. Corp. (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 1004, 1024-1025.

A claim of failure to prevent FEHA violations must be predicated on an actionable claim of those violations, such as discrimination or harassment. Trujillo v. N. Cty. Transit Dist. (1998) 63 Cal. App. 4th 280, 289; Scotch v. Art Institute of Cal. (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 986, 1021 (“the ‘Failure to Maintain’ cause of action can survive only if a ‘Retaliation’ cause of action survives.”). “There’s no logic that says an employee who has not been discriminated against can sue an employer for not preventing discrimination that didn’t happen, for not having a policy to prevent discrimination when no discrimination occurred. Employers should not be held liable to employees for failure to take necessary steps to prevent such conduct, except where the actions took place and were not prevented.” Trujillo v. N. Cty. Transit Dist. (1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 280, 289 (citations and quotation omitted).

The elements of a claim for failure to prevent harassment, discrimination, or retaliation. To succeed on this claim, plaintiff must prove that:

  1. she was an employee of defendant;
  2. she was subjected to harassment, discrimination, or retaliation in the course of employment;
  3. defendant failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent the harassment, discrimination, or retaliation;
  4. she was harmed; and
  5. defendant’s failure to take preventative steps was a substantial factor in causing the harm

CACI No. 2527; see also BAJI 12.11 (the elements of a cause of action for Failure to Prevent Discrimination are: (i) Plaintiff was subjected to discrimination; (ii) Defendant failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent discrimination; and (iii) This failure caused plaintiff to suffer injury, damage, loss or harm); Lelaind v. City and County of San Francisco (N.D. Cal. 2008) 576 F.Supp.2d 1079, 1103.

Useful Resources for Failure to Prevent Discrimination and Harassment in Violation of FEHA

Recent Rulings on Failure to Prevent Discrimination and Harassment in Violation of FEHA

26-50 of 10000 results

RE: REPORT OF ADMINISTRATION, PET’N FOR PREDISTRIBUTION

Proof of service in the manner provided in CCP § 415.10 (30 days personal service) or CCP § 415.30 (30 days proof of mailing with Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt) on each person claiming an interest in, or having title to or possession of, the property. PrC § 851(a)(2) 3. Proposed Order DENISE HILL HEATHER LEDGERWOOD STONECREST ACQUISITIONS, LLC HEATHER LEDGERWOOD SYLVIA ANN COVINGTON

  • Hearing

    Feb 02, 2021

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

ESTATE OF ALFRED LEWIS MERRELL

Verified declaration by petitioner to clarify percentage of property requested to be passed to petitioner. The court can only confirm ½ interest in community property as belonging to the surviving spouse and determine ½ interest as passing to the surviving spouse. 2. Proposed Order GEORGE DAT MING OWYANG JANET SIN CHAN OWYANG RAYMOND CHAN PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: 1. Verified declaration by petitioner to include Wells Fargo Bank in Item # 8.

  • Hearing

    Feb 02, 2021

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: PET’N TO APPROVE 3RD & FNL ACCT & RPT OF TRUSTEE FROM 4-1-19 - 2-3-20; FEES

ERICKSON THE ERICKSON 1991 FAMILY TRUST FILED ON 01/29/19 BY AMBER ISAKSON PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: 1. Appearances to report status, including discovery 2. Proof of service in the manner provided in CCP § 415.10 (30 days personal service) or CCP § 415.30 (30 days proof of mailing with Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt) on each person claiming an interest in, or having title to or possession of, the property.

  • Hearing

    Feb 02, 2021

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

PETITION OF JESSICA M PACHECO

RE: OSC RE: NAME CHANGE FILED BY JESSICA M PACHECO PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Drop. Duplicate entry. PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Petition Approved Proposed Order Submitted No Appearance Required MICKAYLEE RHODES

  • Hearing

    Feb 02, 2021

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

LORI CARROLL VS ECOLAB INC., ET AL.

Code of Civil Procedure section 403 permits the court to order transfer of a case pending in another court if the cases involve common questions of law or fact, if the cases are not complex, and if the other case meets the criteria set forth in Code of Civil Procedure section 404.1. (Code Civ. Proc., § 403.)

  • Hearing

    Feb 02, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

ANTONIO RAMOS, ET AL VS. HOME CONSTRUCTION SOLUTIONS CORP.

AS IT IS IN BANKRUPTY AND CANNOT PARTICIPATE IN THE HEARING ON THE MOTIONS, THE COURT FINDS THAT THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE REQUIRE THE MOTIONS TO BE CONTINUED. THE COURT ALSO NOTES THAT SOME OF THE NOTICE OF MOTIONS SEEK FEES AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF AND SOME AGAINST BOTH PLAINTIFF AND COUNSEL. THE COURT WILL NOT AWARD SANCTIONS AGAINST A PARTY OR COUNSEL NOT IDENTIFIED BY NAME IN THE NOTICE OF MOTION.

  • Hearing

    Feb 02, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MATTER OF GEORGE A. MATSUKAS TRUST

Nature of Proceedings: Status Update Appearances required. Due to staffing limitations, processing times may be delayed. To assist in processing, attorneys and parties should include the next court date in the “Filing Description” field provided by the electronic service provider. That field is also used for further descriptions of the document being e-filed, so be sure to put the calendar date FIRST in the field – BEFORE any further description of the document being e-filed (e.g.: 06/28/16 For XYZ).

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Judge Jed Beebe
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

ESTATE OF JACK J. HERNANDEZ

Due to staffing limitations, processing times may be delayed. To assist in processing, attorneys and parties should include the next court date in the “Filing Description” field provided by the electronic service provider. That field is also used for further descriptions of the document being e-filed, so be sure to put the calendar date FIRST in the field – BEFORE any further description of the document being e-filed (e.g.: 06/28/16 For XYZ).

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Judge Jed Beebe
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

MATTER OF ORVALINEA L. MARION TRUST

That field is also used for further descriptions of the document being e-filed, so be sure to put the calendar date FIRST in the field – BEFORE any further description of the document being e-filed (e.g.: 06/28/16 For XYZ).

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Judge Jed Beebe
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

GRDNSHIP OF WENDY RUIZ

RE: PET’N FOR APPTMNT OF GRDN OF PERSON FILED ON 11/30/20 BY WENDY COREAS RUIZ PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: 1. Court Investigator’s Report 2. Order Appointing Guardian of Minor Form GC-240 (revised 7-1-16) Note: No temporary orders are currently in place. Unable to review. File is unavailable at this time. Need appearances

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CONS. OF NANCY SHEPSON

Rates requested for paralegal fees are in excess of the $150.00 maximum generally permitted per Guidelines for Probate Rules - Attachments. 3. Further verified declaration by Attorney Hand in support of request for time spent to prepare petition for attorney’s fees and related documents in support of fees. Guidelines to Local Rules authorize 2.5 hours. 4. Proposed Order HARTOG, BAER & HAND LEIGHTON A BURREY MATTHEW J LEV REBECCA McMASTERS LEIGHTON A BURREY REBECCA ROMONEK LEIGHTON A.

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

PETITION OF: DAVID LESLIE O'RIORDAN

RE: OSC RE: CHANGE OF NAME FOR COOPER WARREN O'RIORDAN PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Petition Approved Proposed Order Submitted No Appearance Required COOPER WARREN O'RIORDAN DAVID LESLIE O'RIORDAN PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: Proposed Order C.C. COUNTY HEALTH SERVICES DEPT KATHLEEN R LAPLANTE MANUEL GARCIA VIRGINIA M GEORGE

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CONS OF LIPIKA BORKAKOTY BARDALAI

Verified declaration by petitioner to include ages and relationships of each person listed in Item # 8. PrC § 8002 4. Verified declaration by petitioner to include decedent’s parents in Item # 8 or if deceased, to include their names and dates of death. LR 7.151(d) 5. Proof of mailing Notice of Petition to Administer Estate and copy of petition to all heirs and beneficiaries. PrC § 8110; LR 7.151(e) 6. Lodge Original Will (w/legal process). PrC § 8200 7.

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CONSERVATORSHIP OF HOWARD ASHCRAFT

RE: PET’N FOR PAYMENT OF TRAVELING EXPENSES FILED ON 04/10/20 BY JODY ROSS PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Superseded by Line # 7.A. PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances The Court is waiting for these items: Report of Atty. Ronald K. Mullin C.C. COUNTY HEALTH SERVICES DEPT STEVEN P RETTIG JAMIE DULIK RONALD K. MULLIN

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CONS. OF KENNETH WARDELL BLACKWELL SR.

PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances to report status of filing first accounting Notes: 1. Letters of Temporary Conservatorship of Person/Estate issued to Kenneth Wardell Blackwell, Jr. 9-4-2019. 2. Reportedly, conservatee is now deceased. KENNETH WARDELL BLACKWELL JR VERLEANA D GREEN KENNETH WARDELL BLACKWELL SR MAGANY ABBASS PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Drop.

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: COMPLIANCE RE FILING TRUST ACCOUNTING SET BY D14 ON 10/02/19

PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances to report status of filing 2nd accounting, pursuant to Order filed 10-2-2019. Note: Letters of Conservatorship of Estate issued to Clare Pimental 9-27-2017. CLARE M. PIMENTAL TERESA L GREEN JUDITH PIMENTAL JONATHAN T. THOMPSON PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: Proposed Order The Court is waiting for these items: Court Investigator’s Report C.C.

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: PET’N FOR AUTHORITY TO USE ADDL FUNDS TO REMODEL

FILED ON 12/01/20 BY DAVID HANKS PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances DAVID HANKS TRACY S REGLI ROGER BERG PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: 1. Appearances 2. Proof of mailing Judicial Council Form Notice of Hearing with new hearing date to all persons entitled to receive notice 3. Proposed Order HOWARD E. ASHCRAFT JOSCELYN JONES TORRU HOWARD E.

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

DIEGO GARCIA, ET AL. VS U.S. DEPT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.

(NOTE: All hearings currently set in Department 29 of the Spring Street Courthouse are taken off calendar subject to being reset and notified by the receiving court Re: New hearing dates.) Judicial Assistant is directed to give notice to Plaintiff, who upon receipt of this notice, is ordered to give notice to all parties of record.

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

DIEGO GARCIA, ET AL. VS U.S. DEPT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.

Judicial Assistant is directed to give notice to Plaintiff, who upon receipt of this notice, is ordered to give notice to all parties of record.

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

MILDRED MANCE, BY AND THROUGH HER REPRESENATIVE AND ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, REGINA MANCE VS GLEN PARK AT VALLEY VILLAGE

LEGAL STANDARD Per Code of Civil Procedure section 36, subdivision (a), “A party to a civil action who is over 70 years of age may petition the court for a preference, which the court shall grant if the court makes both of the following findings: [¶] (1) The party has a substantial interest in the action as a whole. [¶] (2) The health of the party is such that a preference is necessary to prevent prejudicing the party’s interest in the litigation.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 36, subd. (a).)

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

DO WOO KIM VS JOON CHUL PARK

Due to attorney error, this attorney included the 2nd cause of action on his request for dismissal by accident. This error was discovered in September, and counsel attempted to file a notice of errata on 9/21/20. However, a notice of errata is insufficient to reverse an entered dismissal of a cause of action. Counsel discovered that the notice of errata had been rejected on 11/27/2020, and immediately prepared this CCP 473, subdivision (b) motion.

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

SUNPOWER CAPITAL, LLC VS BEN HE, ET AL.

Discussion Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without prejudice: The Declaration of Brunilda Cuellar (“Cuellar”) states only that she is Plaintiff’s Custodian of Records, that she has custody and control of the records and files pertaining to the lease, and that Plaintiff filed this lawsuit against He and Wang, that He and Wang were served but failed to file any responsive pleadings. (Cuellar Decl., ¶¶1-4.)

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

HARCO NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, A CORPORATION VS FRANCISCO PRECIADO PEREZ, ET AL.

(NOTE: All hearings currently set in Department 29 of the Spring Street Courthouse are taken off calendar subject to being reset and notified by the receiving court Re: New hearing dates.) Judicial Assistant is directed to give notice to Plaintiff, who upon receipt of this notice, is ordered to give notice to all parties of record.

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

MILDRED MANCE, BY AND THROUGH HER REPRESENATIVE AND ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, REGINA MANCE VS GLEN PARK AT VALLEY VILLAGE

LEGAL STANDARD Per Code of Civil Procedure section 36, subdivision (a), “A party to a civil action who is over 70 years of age may petition the court for a preference, which the court shall grant if the court makes both of the following findings: [¶] (1) The party has a substantial interest in the action as a whole. [¶] (2) The health of the party is such that a preference is necessary to prevent prejudicing the party’s interest in the litigation.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 36, subd. (a).)

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

PERSOLVE LEGAL GROUP, LLP VS LETICIA HERNANDEZ

On June 5, 2020, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Hernandez and Does 1-100 for: Breach of Contract Money Lent Account Stated On November 3, 2020, Hernandez’s default was entered. An Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to Proceed with Default Judgment is set for February 1, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Feb 01, 2021

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we load this page.