This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Employment Law
California Family Rights Act
Wrongful Termination

Christopher J. Anthony v. Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, Wireless

Published: Dec. 24, 2010 | Result Date: Aug. 27, 2010 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:09-cv-01024-GEB-KJM Summary Judgment –  Defense

Court

USDC Eastern


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Joseph J. Wiseman


Defendant

Catherine S. Nasser
(Jones Day)

Aaron L. Agenbroad
(Jones Day)


Facts

Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless employed Christopher Anthony as an operations manager. He went to a company dinner on Dec. 14, 2007, before which he had consumed two beers, and drank a martini and a beer at the dinner. Anthony threw food that had been in his mouth at others, made inappropriate noises and remarks, improperly touched his female supervisor, fell off of a chair, and urinated on a supervisor while in the parking lot. Anthony did not remember the events of the evening.

In a Dec. 17 email to his coworkers, Anthony apologized for his behavior at the dinner and said that he was at a loss for why he acted that way and that he went to Kaiser over the weekend. Anthony subsequently made four doctor visits and requested Family Medical Leave on Jan. 9.

Anthony was sent home on Jan. 10 and on Jan. 15, Verizon officially terminated Anthony's employment stating that his behavior had violated Verizon's code of conduct.

Anthony later sued Verizon for disability discrimination in violation of California Government Code Section 12940(a), failure to reasonably accommodate, retaliation, violation of the California Family Rights Act, and wrongful termination.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff argued that defendant wrongfully terminated his employment due to his disability, and retaliated against him after he filed a claim under the California Family Rights Act.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant argued that he was not drunk, but rather suffering from anxiety, depression, and possibly bipolar disorder, which manifested itself that evening after three and a half drinks. Defendant contended that plaintiff was fired because he engaged in inappropriate conduct at a company party. Further, defendant argued that plaintiff could not prove disability, failure to accommodate, or that his termination was based on disability.

Result

The court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment.


#102353

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390