Harassment

The FEHA does not protect a female employee against discrimination or harassment for undergoing oocyte (egg) retrieval procedures to donate eggs to others or freeze them for her own future use.  At least if those medical procedures are not needed to overcome infertility or some similar medical condition, they are not pregnancy or pregnancy-related, nor a disability and so are… Read More

Volokh’s conduct is not within the ambit of section 527.6’s definition of harassment. Volokh’s identification of Luo in a law review article and on his blog was not unlawful violence or a credible threat of violence. There was no evidence that Volokh stalked Luo, made harassing phone calls, or sent her harassing correspondence. Volokh’s writings served a legitimate purpose—a discussion… Read More

This decision affirms a judgment for the plaintiff in an age discrimination and harassment case, rejecting all of the employer's many arguments.  First, the suit was timely even though the harassment had been on-going for many years.  There was no showing that the harassment had achieved "permanence" so as to prevent continued accrual from renewed harassment.  Permanence comes from employer… Read More

Under CCP 527.6(j), an anti-harrassment injunction may be extended only once for a period of 5 years or less without evidence of further harassment since the original anti-harassment injunction was issued.  To obtain an additional extension of the injunction, post-order harassment must be shown. Read More

A civil harassment order is affirmed due to deficiencies of the pro per appellant's opening brief.  It didn't separately state and title its arguments or support them with authority and citations to the record.  Insofar as it attacked the sufficiency of the evidence, it failed to set forth a fair recital of all the relevant evidence. Read More

A civil harassment injunction entered in favor of an attorney for one of a divorcing couple against the attorney for the other spouse was reversed.  Insofar as the injunction was based on emails that defendant sent plaintiff about the divorce, the emails didn't threaten violence and so were protected First Amendment speech which could not be considered in support of… Read More

Owners of adjoining apartments mediated Doe's civil harassment prevention action, reaching an agreement that provided, among other things, that the parties agree not to disparage one another.  This decision holds that read in light of the limited nature of the action and surrounding circumstances, the provision could not reasonably be read to ban Doe from saying negative things about Olson… Read More