GO TO:


    - INDEX OF CASES

    - FORUMS

    - ARCHIVES

          • NEWS

          • CASES

          • EDITORIALS

  October 27, 2008
  Source:  WorkInjury.com
  ----------------------------

CA/2:   Personnel Action May Be Discrim., Not Emotional Distress

This is an unpublished opinion just issued by the Second District.

An administrative assistant for the Los Angeles Interagency Metropolitan Crime Task Force sued the City of La Verne and the state Department of Justice for intentional infliction of emotional distress.

The facts used by the plaintiff in support of her suit involved various personnel actions over a period of years. There were also substantial issues regarding who exactly was the plaintiff's employer and whether an employment relationship was or wasn't needed before an emotional distress action could be upheld.

The appellate court ruled that the trial court's summary judgments regarding the employment issues should be either modified or reversed, agreeing that the Department of Justice was not the plaintiff's employer but leaving open the issue for trial as to whether the City was or wasn't.

However, the end of the decision is significant. The Court held that personnel action, regardless of the facts, simply could not support an emotional distress claim and were at best grounds for an employment discrimination action under the Fair Employment and Housing Act.

The adverse employment actions alleged in Dorman's complaint are within the realm of personnel management decisions that are unlawful only if motivated by prohibited discriminatory considerations. "An essential element of [a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress] is a pleading of outrageous conduct beyond the bounds of human decency. [Citations.]

"Managing personnel is not outrageous conduct beyond the bounds of human decency, but rather conduct essential to the welfare and prosperity of society. A simple pleading of personnel management activity is insufficient to support a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, even if improper motivation is alleged.

"If personnel management decisions are improperly motivated, the remedy is a suit against the employer for discrimination. (citation)"

The case is Dorman v. Dept. of Justice.

To read the full opinion,

PLEASE CLICK HERE.