• An individual disability discrimination, constructive termination, failure to engage, etc., case wherein the Plaintiff alleges that in response to requests for accommodations based on medical limitations, the employer affirmatively stated that no accommodation was possible.  Plaintiff's opening demand was $650,000.

  • An individual age discrimination case wherein the Plaintiff alleges that after 15+ years of employment, he was wrongfully terminated due to his age, and as a pretext for which the company used an alleged inappropriate social media message. Plaintiff position was that the company had undertaken phases of layoffs and termination in an effort to oust older employees. Opening demand was $150,000.

  • An individual wage and hour case with additional allegations re disability discrimination and failure to engage based on at least one industrial injury that interfered with Plaintiff's work abilities and which caused her to require accommodations and other restrictions in her duties as Housekeeping person. Opening demand $350,000.

  • An individual wage and hour case wherein the Plaintiff alleges that he was paid below minimum wage for an extended period of time and throughout his employment, was not paid OT, and otherwise was not afforded meal and rest breaks. Plaintiff's opening demand was $140,000.

  • An individual wage and hour and wrongful termination case as between a domestic employee and her former employer wherein the Plaintiff alleges that after 15 years of employment she was paid below minimum wage, was provided no meal breaks or rest breaks, was provided with no wage statements, and other subjected to harassing and retaliatory acts leading to her alleged constructive termination.  Plaintiff’s opening demand was $285,000.


  • A disability discrimination and wrongful termination action, as well as some ancillary wage and hour claims, by a pizza delivery driver against his former employer. Plaintiff was injured while working for another employer (during a second job) and his injuries therefrom caused him to be taken off-work for many months. Once the Plaintiff presented his Pizza employer with a release to work letter with certain restrictions, Plaintiff alleges that he was told that the employer couldn’t accommodate his restrictions and that he was essentially terminated based on his disability. Plaintiff also alleges inter alia that the employer also failed to engage in an interactive process vis-à-vis finding him an accommodation during the period that his restrictions were in play.  Plaintiff’s opening demand was $280,000.


  • Plaintiff was employed by a transit company wherein she was driver of wheelchair accessible vans. During the course of her employment, plaintiff suffered an injury that necessitated her to go on disability for several years. She was at first placed on temporary total disability, and later released to work with permanent restrictions. Plaintiff alleges that she presented her doctor’s note with her new restrictions, and sought an accommodation. Plaintiff further alleges that her employer did not provide her with a reasonable interactive process nor offered her any accommodation or alternative light duty work. In addition to a claim for disability discrimination and wrongful termination, Plaintiff also maintain a wage and hour claim based on uninterrupted meal breaks and rest breaks not being provided. Plaintiff’s opening demand was $300,000.


  • A individual wage and hour case wherein 2 plaintiffs allege that for the entirety of their employment at a garment company they did not received: uninterrupted meal breaks, uninterrupted rest breaks, overtime hours were paid at the regular rate, as well as waiting penalties, PAGA penalties and attorneys fees. Plaintiff’s opening demand was $85,000.


  • A disputed liability and damages case wherein the gravamen of the claims were for disability discrimination. Plaintiff alleges that he was hired by a temp/staffing agency and assigned to work for another company, the special employer, during which time he sustained an industrial injury. A few days after his injury and after reporting his disability and his work restrictions, Plaintiff alleges that he was written up twice in 5 days and ultimately reassinged to another, less desirable, position and terminated thereafter on a pretexual basis. Opening demand $180,000. 


  • A disputed liability and damages employment matter wherein the Plaintiff alleges sexual harassment, retaliation and wrongful termination. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that she and her “boss” were first friends, later became employer-employee, and later still became romantically involved. Thereafter, it is alleged that a variety of incidents occurred between the Plaintiff and her boss, e.g., emails, text messages, and other in-person situations, that not only caused their personal relationship to sour but also the employment relationship. Plaintiff alleges that after her termination, several attempts were made to re-hire her. Plaintiff’s opening demand was $695,000.


  • A disputed liability individual wage and hour case wherein the Plaintiff, who was the night warden/patient custodian at a facility alleges that he was not allowed uninterrupted meal breaks and rest periods for many years. Plaintiff’s opening demand was $120,000.


  • A dispute liability disability discrimination case wherein the Plaintiff alleges that after suffering a workplace injury, and while he was receiving treatment and under a doctor’s prescribed work restrictions, his employment was abruptly terminated when he refused to sweep the floor as requested. Plaintiff further contended that he was led to believe that he was being terminated on that day as opposed to merely being sent home for the day for insubordination. Opening demand was $180,000.


  • A disputed liability disability discrimination case wherein the Plaintiff alleges that she worked for many years as a housekeeper for a hotel/motel. Plaintiff was injured on the job, and after taking a few days of medical leave per her doctor’s suggestion, her hours/work was significantly cut upon her return because she was asking for reasonable accommodations and modified work based on the doctor’s prescribed work limitations. Plaintiff’s opening demand was $500,000.


  • A disputed liability “joint employer liability” case wherein the Plaintiff alleges that as a result of an injury both “site employer” and the staffing agency discriminated against the Plaintiff based on disability, retaliated against the Plaintiff based thereon, failed to provide accommodations, failed to engage in a good faith interactive process, and ultimately wrongfully terminated said employee.  Opening demand was $240,000.


  • A disputed liability employment case wherein the focus of the case was pertaining to disability discrimination, failure to engage and failure to accommodate an alleged disability arising from a workplace accident.  While there was a companion workers comp case, that case was not at issue.  Plaintiff alleges that she was not provided with an opportunity to find other work, was not offered a reasonable accommodation, and that she would have been able to satisfy the essential job functions of other positions if offered to her. Plaintiff was a 20+ year veteran in her position, and alleges that since her termination, her life has taken a turn for the worst. Plaintiff’s opening demand was $85,000.


  • A disputed liability disability discrimination case. Plaintiff worked as a general laborer for an office furniture manufacturer. He alleges that he was carrying boxes, and in doing so had his foot/ankle run over by a forklift truck causing him serious personal injuries and causing him to ultimately be reported as P&S with permanent restrictions. Plaintiff alleges that the employer did not participate in a reasonable interactive process nor provided him with adequate accommodations or alternative work. Plaintiff’s opening demand was $240,000.


  • A disputed liability religious discrimination case. Plaintiff alleges that she has worked at a company for upwards of 20 years and that during the entire period her religious beliefs and affiliations were well known to the employer such that she was never asked to work on a Sunday (even though the company’s shifts required every similarly situated employee to work 2 Saturdays and 2 Sundays every month) because of her belief that it’s “God’s Day” that she used for service to her church and community as well as for rest and contemplation.  Plaintiff alleges that her employment was wrongfully terminated when she refused to work on Sundays given the then new fiscal constraints on the company necessitating said work by Plaintiff on Sundays.  Opening demand was $480,000.


  • A disputed liability case against a restaurant chain alleging failure to provide uninterrupted meal breaks and rest breaks, failure to furnish wage and hour statements, waiting time penalties as well as emotional distress and attorney’s fees, totaling an alleged $500,000 plus in damages. Plaintiff’s opening demand was $340,000.


  • A dispute liability wage/hour and PAGA case arising from an employment relationship that ended. Plaintiff alleged being owed for meal breaks, rest breaks, OT, as well as for a variety of wage statement violations.  Plaintiff's opening demand was $180,000.


  • A disputed liability wage and hour case that also involved an alleged wrongful termination based on retaliation and sexual harassment. Plaintiff, who worked for a pharmacy alleged that she was repeatedly sexually harassed, ultimately terminated and that during the term of her employment her hours were short on her time sheets and that she was not paid OT or 2xOT as required. Plaintiff’s opening demand was $225,000.


  • A disputed liability and damages wage and hour case wherein Plaintiff who worked as a printing machine operator for a publishing company alleges inter alia that he was not paid his entitled overtime, was not provided with uninterruped meal breaks and rest breaks, as well as claims under PAGA. Plaintiff's opening demand was $950,000.


  • A wage and hour case wherein the Plaintiff, a chef, alleges that he was not paid overtime, was not provided meal breaks or rest breaks, was not provided with accurate wage statements, and was not reimbursed for both working off the clock or for expenses that he advanced for the employers by using his car for errands. Plaintiff's opening demand was $200,000.


  • A disputed liability and damages employment matter alleging inter alia wrongful termination, disability discrimination, failure to engage, and failure to accommodate, etc. Plaintiff, a 17 year veteran of the company was injured during work, and alleges that she was forced to take an extended leave of absence despite being released back to work though with restrictions. Employer claimed that the restrictions made Plaintiff unable to perform essential job duties. Plaintiff alleges that upon having her restrictions removed, the employer had already undertaken to hire a replacement, and that she was not offered a comparable position. Plaintiff also alleges that while she was on 'forced' leave, the employer did not enage her in an interactive process and also failed to properly accommodate her based on her disability. Plaintiff's opening demand was $950,000.


  • A disputed liability and damages employment matter alleging inter alia harassment, discrimination based on disability (and related claims for failure to accommodate and have an interactive process) and national origin, wage and hour violations, wrongful termination, etc.  Plaintiff was a handyman/tradesman working for a property owner/management company, and alleges that a direct supervisor harassed him, did not reimburse him for items, and otherwise discriminated against him and verbally cast him in negative light. Opening demand was $360,000.


  • Liability and damages are in dispute in this three Plaintiff employment case against one employer wherein the gravamen of the allegations pertain to sexual harassment by a direct supervisor, battery and constructive termination among other claims. Plaintiffs allege that their direct supervisor showed them pornographic pictures, propositioned them, touched them without consent, etc., all of which was reported with no meaningful response by the employer, and which ultimately gave rise to their constructive termination. Plaintiffs’ combined opening demand was $500,000.00


  • A disputed liability and damages employment case. Plaintiffs worked for a dental office. They allege that: (1) each of their employments were wrongfully and constructively terminated because of a disability; (2) that the employer failed to facilitate an interactive process; (3) various meal break, rest break violations; (4) wage statement violations; and (5) retaliation for whistleblowing the employer’s alleged violation of certain patient safety regulations/standards of care. Plaintiffs sought recovery of past and future lost wages, statutory penalties, as well as emotional distress.  Plaintiffs’ combined opening demand was $350,000.


  • Plaintiff was unloading a truck during, and as part of, his regular work duties, at which time something fell on his foot injuring him. He requested to go to the doctor for treatment. The details of the balance of the alleged facts are in dispute. Plaintiff alleges that due to his injury, the time he had to take off work for treatment and doctor’s visits, and not being provided with reasonable accommodations (and alleged failure to enter into an interactive process), he was ultimately wrongfully terminated. The Defendant points to a violation of the company’s tardy/late/absence policy and that the doctor’s note(s) provided did not support the Plaintiff’s absence from work, rather they only supported a need for alternative work duties/accommodations, which the Defendant allegedly provided.  Opening demand was $145,000.


  • Plaintiff alleges that inter alia that the Defendant discriminated against him based on his age and disability in ending the employment relationship and otherwise failed to enter into an interactive process to discuss reasonable accommodations. Defendant contends inter alia that the lay-off was due to closures of one or more locations which no longer necessitated the Plaintiff’s employment.  Plaintiff’s opening demand was $120,000.


  • This is a FEHA, harassment, retaliation, wrongful termination case. Plaintiff alleged inter alia that having reported sexual harassment by another employee upon yet another employee (or two), that his employer retaliated based on the foregoing complaints/reports and as such said employment was constructively terminated.  Plaintiff’s opening demand was $120,000.


  • Plaintiff was a former employee at Defendant’s restaurant. During the term of his employment, Plaintiff alleges that he did not receive overtime, was not provided with rest and meal breaks, he was not provided with his last paycheck on time, and a variety of other claims such as PAGA claim, waiting time penalties, conversion, unfair competition, etc.  Plaintiff claimed that his claims as well as the PAGA penalties were approx. $65,000, and the opening demand was $165,000.


  • Three Plaintiff case alleging hostile work environment which allegedly forced all three Plaintiffs to leave their jobs. It was alleged that the Manager of the business repeatedly made three broad categories of comments to each of the Plaintiffs – one based on sexual orientation, national origin, and race. It was also alleged that the business started to cut the employees hours in response to their complaints about the foregoing treatment. Plaintiffs’ further allege that they had to seek therapy and psych treatment as a result of both the alleged hostile work environment as well as from losing their jobs and having to find new employment.  Plaintiffs’ collective demand was approx. $435,000.


  • This is a gender, association, harassment, retaliation, and failure to prevent discrimination and retaliation case.  Plaintiff has been an employee of the Defendant since 2000.  The gravamen of her complaints arise from a series of alleged events wherein she was sexually and otherwise harassed by a co-worker and/or supervisor, and thereafter a series of event arising from Plaintiff’s work performance and alleged wrongful withheld promotion(s).  Plaintiff’s opening demand was $625,000.


  • Two former employees, who are mother and daughter, bring an action for wrongful termination, harassment, failure to prevent harassment, retaliation, etc., arising from allegations that a co-worker was sexually harassing the daughter which went unchecked, and that upon the daughter’s and the mother’s reporting of said harassment, both were not invited to come back to work – the mother’s claim was inter alia an associational claim of retaliation.  The employer, a temp. agency, and the company wherein the Plaintiffs worked, denied liability claiming no notice of any alleged bad acts, that the downsizing was a result of a down-tick in business as well as a piece of machinery being broken, and that their investigation did not yield a finding of sexual harassment.  Each Plaintiff demanded $350,000.


  • Plaintiff worked as a valet and parking lot attendant.  Plaintiff claimed inter alia that he was wrongfully terminated, that his wages were improperly calculated, that his hours were rounded down, that some of his hours were not paid, that his overtime was paid in cash at his regular rate of pay as opposed to 1.5x.  He further claims that he was not afforded his meal and rest breaks based on the hours that he worked on any given day.  Lastly, Plaintiff claimed that due to a foot injury, he was unable to properly perform his duties without pain and discomfort, and that we he informed his employer they failed to engage in an interactive process to address the issue.  Opening demand was $500,000.


  • This case arises from a dispute between Plaintiff, who was hired by Defendant, a wholesale shoe company.  Plaintiff was hired as a graphic designer with a background in shoe design. Defendants are stating that Plaintiff was underqualified for the position after reviewing her initial shoe designs in comparison to others that they had hired in the past. Plaintiff sued Defendants with complaints of discrimination and claimed to have been denied meal breaks. 


  • This case involves a Plaintiff who is suing his former employer based on discrimination and failure to prevent discrimination. Plaintiff on several occasions took an exam to grant him a promotion but was continually rejected despite having excellent test scores. Plaintiff contends that he was discriminated against due to his age and cultural background. 


  • This case involves an individual and his former employer. Plaintiff believes he was wrongfully terminated. Specifically, Plaintiff took time off from work due to an injury and when he returned to work with a doctor’s note, his supervisor advised the Plaintiff to pick up his final check. Defendant’s believe that the Plaintiff’s immigration status may be in question, as the doctor’s note the Plaintiff presented had a different name.


  • This case arises from an appeal from summary judgment entered in favor of Defendant Wal-Mart Stores on all of Plaintiff’s employment-related claims. Plaintiff worked for Walmart for ten years and was terminated for job abandonment. Plaintiff requested and used protected FMLA/CFRA leave for adoption placement of her baby nephew following the death of the child’s father. Due to the holiday rush, the store manager requested the Plaintiff to return to work. Plaintiff was denied a second request for FMLA leave due to not having worked a certain number of hours. Store manager suggested cutting Plaintiff’s work hours so that she may use her vacation time to complete the adoption process. Plaintiff was then terminated from Walmart and was told by Human Resources that the store manager had also been terminated. Plaintiff sought employment at another Walmart store but was blocked by the Human Resources manager from being hired due to misconduct.


  • A case in which Plaintiff claims she was wrongfully terminated as a result of her disability, Cerebral Palsy. At the time, Plaintiff was terminated after a two day training period. Plaintiff’s husband is an employee of the company and recommended his wife as an employee. Defendant states they were unaware of Plaintiff’s disability at time of hire.


  • Employment case on appeal for enforcement of an Arbitration clause.  Underlying case included claims for Discrimination, Retaliation, Failure to Present Discrimination and Retaliation, Failure to provide reasonable accommodation, Failure to engage in good faith interactive process, and wrongful termination.  Defendant hired Plaintiff to work as a general assistant. Plaintiff terminated. Plaintiff was diagnosed with cancer. Plaintiff immediately informed his employer that he would require surgery and time off from work due to his condition. Plaintiff underwent surgery and took a one month leave to recover. Plaintiff returned to work with doctor’s work restrictions. The restrictions given to Plaintiff by his doctor included no lifting more than 20 pounds. Despite providing Defendants with his work restrictions, Plaintiff’s managers did not offer Plaintiff modified work and directed Plaintiff to continue working as normal. Plaintiff was regularly asked to violate his doctor’s restrictions and lifted heavy items. Following his return to work, Plaintiff’s managers began treating him differently and began looking for reasons to reprimand him. Defendants discriminated and retaliated against Plaintiff by terminating his employment after Plaintiff informed Defendants of his disability or perceived disability, medical condition or perceived medical condition, and request for accommodations.


​​© Copyright 2012 - 2020 - Sepassi & Tarighati, LLP

The information presented in this website should not be construed as legal advice nor serve to create an attorney-client relationship.  

Nothing stated in this website is intended, or should be construed, as there being a partnership, an endorsement or an affiliation

between the owner of this website and any third party or third party company identified in this website.

Terms and rates subject to change without notice. All rights are reserved.