Calero v. Unisys Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the privilege does not apply to plaintiffs allegations of “harassment and discrimination” by a manager
• concluding that an award of costs and fees was not warranted because “removal was based on reasonable and supported interpretation of unsettled California law”
• stating that under the FEHA, “[a]lthough individual managers cannot be held personally liable for discriminatory ‘personnel decisions’ [under the FEHA], they may be held personally liable for unlawful ‘harassment’”
• “There is no authority for the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JS-6 / REMAND CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL Case No. CV 19-5793-DMG (FFMx
• “Tort recovery pursued via a separate civil action is permitted if the conduct of the employer has a ‘questionable’ relationship to the employment or where the employer steps out of his proper role.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).