Cranford v. City of Huntington Beach
Catherine Denise Cranford appeals from the judgment in her action against her former employer, the City of Huntington Beach (the City). Cranford alleged she suffered workplace harassment by a co-worker due to her sexual orientation, and retaliation by the City for having complained about the harassment in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12940). Cranford also alleged her medical privacy rights were violated by the City when a letter written by her therapist in connection with her worker’s compensation claim containing Cranford’s allegations of workplace sexual orientation harassment was released to investigators outside the City’s worker’s compensation unit. The trial court granted the City’s motion for summary adjudication on the FEHA causes of action, and a jury found that although Cranford’s medical privacy rights were violated, she was not harmed. On appeal, Cranford contends: (1) there were material issues of fact as to the FEHA causes of action precluding summary adjudication; (2) insufficient evidence supports the special verdict; (3) the trial court abused its discretion by denying her motions to exclude certain evidence; and (4) the trial court erred by denying her motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and new trial. We find no error and affirm the judgment.
Comments on Cranford v. City of Huntington Beach