Ogletree Deakins: California Supreme Court Rejects Damages, Back Pay and Reinstatement Where Employer Proves Legitimate Mixed-motive | Practical Law

Ogletree Deakins: California Supreme Court Rejects Damages, Back Pay and Reinstatement Where Employer Proves Legitimate Mixed-motive | Practical Law

This Law Firm Publication by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., discusses the California Supreme Court's February 7, 2013 decision in Harris v. City of Santa Monica on the "mixed-motive defense" in employment discrimination claims under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. The court held that where an employee demonstrates that unlawful discrimination was a substantial motivating factor in an adverse employment action but the employer proves it would have made the same decision absent such discrimination, a court may not award the employee back pay, damages or reinstatement.

Ogletree Deakins: California Supreme Court Rejects Damages, Back Pay and Reinstatement Where Employer Proves Legitimate Mixed-motive

by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.
Published on 07 Feb 2013California, United States
This Law Firm Publication by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., discusses the California Supreme Court's February 7, 2013 decision in Harris v. City of Santa Monica on the "mixed-motive defense" in employment discrimination claims under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. The court held that where an employee demonstrates that unlawful discrimination was a substantial motivating factor in an adverse employment action but the employer proves it would have made the same decision absent such discrimination, a court may not award the employee back pay, damages or reinstatement.