Background
Plaintiff Albert Salinas sues his former employer and supervisor American Marble & Granite Co. (AMGC) and John S. Vega for personal injuries arising from a workplace injury and FEHA claims. According to the allegations, granite particles injured plaintiff’s eyes during the grinder machinery’s daily operation, and plaintiff experienced other physical pain from constant, repetitive movement he had to perform in the course and scope of his job, and from using hand tools. On April 23, 2015, upon returning to work (apparently from a doctor’s appointment), Vega informed plaintiff that his employment was terminated because of his requests to attend doctor’s appointments that interfered with his attendance at work.
On August 5, 2016, plaintiff filed a complaint and on January 30, 2017, the operative first amended complaint (FAC) for (1) disability discrimination (against AMGC), (2) retaliation (against AMGC), (3) wrongful termination in violation of public policy (against AMGC), (
Hearing Date
May 18, 2017
Type
Infliction of Emotional Distress (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Background
Plaintiff Albert Salinas sues his former employer and supervisor American Marble & Granite Co. (AMGC) and John S. Vega for personal injuries arising from a workplace injury and FEHA claims. According to the allegations, granite particles injured plaintiff’s eyes during the grinder machinery’s daily operation, and plaintiff experienced other physical pain from constant, repetitive movement he had to perform in the course and scope of his job, and from using hand tools. On April 23, 2015, upon returning to work (apparently from a doctor’s appointment), Vega informed plaintiff that his employment was terminated because of his requests to attend doctor’s appointments that interfered with his attendance at work.
On August 5, 2016, plaintiff filed a complaint and on January 30, 2017, the operative first amended complaint (FAC) for (1) disability discrimination (against AMGC), (2) retaliation (against AMGC), (3) wrongful termination in violation of public policy (against AMGC), (