New CA Employment and Tort Cases
New Published California Employment and Tort Cases
Employment Case: Can an employer be liable under FEHA for an undisclosed bipolar disability?
The California Court of Appeal Court addressed this issue last month. Below is my one-paragraph case summary from my online publication California Case Summaries™:
Husband v. Target Corporation (2026) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2026 WL 1430244: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order granting defendant employer’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff’s action alleging claims under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA; Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.) for disability discrimination, failure to provide reasonable accommodation, and failure to engage in the interactive process. The trial court granted summary judgment finding that defendant had no knowledge of plaintiff's bipolar disorder when it terminated him for violating the company's workplace violence policy. The Court of Appeal affirmed, holding as a matter of law that an employer is not charged with knowledge of an employee's undisclosed mental disability merely because the employee displayed erratic and irrational behavior on two occasions, since a mental disability was not "the only reasonable interpretation" of the observed conduct, and therefore plaintiff could not establish the prerequisite knowledge element required for FEHA liability on any of his claims. (C.A. 2nd, May 21, 2026.)
Tort Case: Was the City of Long Beach liable for plaintiff’s injury suffered when he fell from a rented electric scooter after hitting an asphalt patch on a sidewalk?
The California Court of Appeal Court addressed this issue last month. Below is my one-paragraph case summary from my online publication California Case Summaries™:
Sargenti v. City of Long Beach (2026) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2026 WL 1362086: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court order granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff action for personal injuries suffered when he fell from a rented electric scooter after hitting an asphalt patch on a sidewalk. The trial court granted defendant’s summary judgment motion on the ground that plaintiff had signed a user agreement with the scooter rental company that waived and released his negligence claims against defendant City of Long Beach (defendant). The Court of Appeal affirmed but on a different ground, concluding that defendant had neither actual nor constructive notice of the allegedly dangerous condition — rejecting plaintiff’s argument that defendant’s original (but subsequently corrected) interrogatory responses admitting it placed the asphalt patch automatically created a triable issue of material fact, and further holding that the Supreme Court's decision in Sweetwater Union High School Dist. v. Gilbane Building Co. (2019) 6 Cal.5th 931 did not authorize courts to consider inadmissible evidence, such as an unauthenticated Google Street View screenshot, in opposition to a summary judgment motion simply because the proponent claims the evidentiary defect could be cured at trial. (C.A. 2nd, May 15, 2026.)
I handle a few select civil cases where I represent plaintiffs or defendants in business, insurance bad faith, personal injury, real property and wrongful death actions. Using my experience as a California civil trial lawyer since 1980, and a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates since 1995, my goal is to get each client the best possible result. My clients get the benefit of big firm experience with small firm attention and reasonable rates. To discuss a potential case, email me at monty@montymcintyre.com, or call me at (619) 990-4312.
Do well and be well.
Best regards,
Monty A. McIntyre, Esq.
Business, Insurance Bad Faith, Real Property and Tort Litigation.
Trial Mentoring™: Trial training & preparation
Podcaster: Trial Alchemy™
Publisher: California Case Summaries™
CA attorney since 1980. ABOTA Member Since 1995
Past President San Diego County Bar Assn., SD ABOTA Chapter
Phone: (619) 990-4312.
Email: monty@montymcintyre.com
