Facts

Plaintiff Rosario Contreras is a 60-year-old customer service worker who was employed with the defendant Family Health Centers of San Diego for about eight years when she was terminated.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff claimed she was terminated from Family Health Centers because she had a right arm injury that she sustained while on the job due to repetitive filing of heavy medical records. The initial injury happened in January 2012, and she filed a workers' compensation claim, which stayed open until after her termination. Plaintiff contended defendant placed her in a light duty position at a call center. Plaintiff contended that her workstation at the call center was a desk inside a cubicle. There was a pull out panel on the right hand side of the desk designed to place a computer mouse. There was no left hand panel that you could pull out of the desk to rest the mouse on the left side of the desk. After a week in the call center, the constant use of the mouse with her right hand made plaintiff's right arm injury worsen. She asked defendant to set up a left-handed mouse station, and for a different mouse. Defendant provided a new roller ball mouse that periodically became stuck. However, it did not modify the desk station. Then, she requested a new mouse that worked. Defendant ordered a new mouse. Plaintiff claimed the mouse was never delivered to plaintiff and her supervisor sent her home after two weeks, and told her to see a doctor. During her time in the call center, she had to reach around her body and use her left hand to navigate the mouse on the right-handed mouse station.

After being sent home in December 2013, plaintiff claimed she returned diligently each month (December, January, and February) with her doctor's work restrictions, restricting her from using her right hand for keyboard work for anything more than 10 minutes per hour. Each time she reported back, she asked her supervisor and human resources if she could go back to work with an accommodation or work a different job. Plaintiff claimed defendant never modified her workstation with a left station, never did an ergonomic assessment of her workspace, nor told her that she was free to look for other jobs on her own. Plaintiff was terminated. The HR representative responsible for trying to accommodate plaintiff admitted that she made the recommendation to terminate her employment in January 2014 well before her condition was deemed medically permanent and stationary in early April 2014.

Plaintiff contended that on the day she was terminated, she was sent separation paperwork that stated she resigned, which it later argued was its standard way of classifying all employees who are unable to find a job so they don't have to list termination when applying to future employers. Plaintiff claimed she was never notified that she would be terminated if she did not find another job with defendant. In May 2014, plaintiff wrote a letter to defendant's CEO and HR and her supervisor, informing them that she wanted her job, that she had no idea they were going to terminate her, and that they did terminate her. Plaintiff claimed that the separation paperwork falsely indicated that plaintiff resigned, and that characterizing it, as a resignation would likely prevent her from getting unemployment benefits. Plaintiff claimed defendant never investigated or responded in any way to her letter.

Plaintiff alleged that she was not reasonably accommodated and that defendant failed to engage in the interactive process with her that led to her wrongful termination.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant contended that for about a year and a half after plaintiff's injury, defendant accommodated her several times, placing her into light duty positions while her right arm was healing. Defendant eventually transferred plaintiff into the call center in December 2013, a position that did not require repetitive heavy lifting. When she again complained of arm pain one week into the new position, she was advised to stop working and see her physician. Plaintiff's medical record from that December 2013 visit indicated she experienced pain in both arms, and requested that she be taken off work completely. Defendant followed up with plaintiff at least monthly to track her progress, but after the physician issued a permanent and stationary report in April 2014, defendant had to terminate her because there were no positions in the organization that only required her to use her right arm less than 10 minutes per hour.

Settlement Discussions

Defendant made a CCP 998 offer of $25,000.

Specials in Evidence

Loe: $115,645 Future Loe: $50,000

Injuries

Plaintiff claimed emotional distress and economic damages.

Result

Plaintiff's verdict for $5,915,645, which included $300,000 in future non-economic damages, $450,000 in past non-economic damages, and $5 million in punitive damages. The punitive damages award was reduced by the court to $1,831,290.

Other Information

Defendant has filed an appeal.

Deliberation

half-day (general verdict); 1 hour (punitive damage)

Length

eight days