The California Supreme Court ruling in Roby v McKesson brings to light some important issues concerning employers' alleged FEHA violations and punitive damages awards. The decision essentially centers on how discrimination and harassment claims are proven, and how punitive damages awards will be reviewed by California appellate courts.
Roby v McKesson should have little practical impact on employers in terms of preventing and avoiding liability for claims. At the same time, the court's ruling that personnel-related actions may be properly considered when assessing the viability of a harassment claim confirms the broad range of evidence potentially available to plaintiffs in support of their claims.
Roby will probably make the dismissal of harassment claims on summary judgment more difficult for employers and their defense attorneys. More noteworthy, Roby clarifies the importance of employers continuing to ensure that supervisors perform their duties including any and all employment actions based on legitimate work-related reasons, and not on any discriminatory or harassing reason.

A member of California Employment Law, Attorneys, representing Employees and Protecting Workers Rights.
Business and Employment Law Attorneys.
Awarded Southern California Super Lawyer 2005 to 2010 by Los Angeles Magazine for Top 5% of Attorneys