> >
Case Name | Harris v. City of Santa Monica | |
---|---|---|
Date | 02/07/2013 | |
Note | California's Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously ruled that an employer can mount a "mixed-motive" defense to a worker's discrimination claim, but such a defense, if accepted by a jury, is not absolute. | |
Citation | S181004 | |
WCC Citation | WCC 39832013 CA |
HARRIS v. CITY OF SANTA MONICA WYNONA HARRIS, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CITY OF SANTA MONICA, Defendant and Appellant. Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney, Joseph Lawrence, Assistant City Attorney, Barbara C. Greenstein, Carol Ann Rohr, Jeanette Schachtner, Anthony P. Serritella and Meishya Yang, Deputy City Attorneys, for Defendant and Appellant. A bus driver alleged that she was fired by the City of Santa Monica (the City) because of her pregnancy in violation of the prohibition on sex discrimination in the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). When the City hired Harris, it gave her its "Guidelines for Job Performance Evaluation," which said: "Preventable accidents . In October 2005, Harris sued the City, alleging that the City fired her because she was pregnant, a form of sex discrimination.
Download full case here.
Download full case here.