Total Articles: 4
CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT RULES ON HARASSMENT AND PUNITIVE DAMAGES ISSUES.
The state Supreme Court ruled on two thorny issues facing employers last month in Roby v. McKesson Corporation. The case addressed an important distinction between what is unlawful harassment and discrimination under state law, overlapping damages, and the constitutional limits of punitive damages. The Court’s opinion provided new authority on two of the issues, harassment and punitive damages.
PUNITIVE DAMAGES AND CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT LAW.
California law authorizes punitive damages to punish and discourage “oppression, fraud, or malice.” Courts have explained that punitive damages are “an expression of moral condemnation” for conduct done with “willful and conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others” or “despicable” conduct.
Employee Who Is Unavailable Due To Disability Unrelated To Work Cannot Recover Back Pay For Period Of Wrongful Demotion (scroll down).
In Davis v. Los Angeles Unified School District Personnel Commission, the California Court of Appeal held that an employee cannot recover back pay during the period when he or she is unable to work due to a non-industrial disability. The court also held that the employee is not entitled to reinstatement until he or she can perform the functions of the job.
California Supreme Court Denies Review of Significant Punitive Damages Decision.
The California Supreme Court has refused to review the decision of an appellate court, which is the first reported employment law case in California (often known as the land of exorbitant and runaway jury verdicts) to address the proper ratio of punitive to compensatory damages.
