MICHAEL FAUST, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA PORTLAND CEMENT COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent. , 150 Cal. App. 4th 864

Summary

The court held that the employee provided sufficient information to the employer to notify it of his need for leave pursuant to the CFRA, but the employer did not advise the employee of his right to leave under the CFRA. It could not be said as a matter of law that the employee unreasonably refused to communicate with the employer's human resources (HR) manager because the employee presented evidence that three other individuals were available to respond to the HR manager's queries. The employee made out a prima facie case of retaliation for exercising his CFRA rights by presenting evidence that he was entitled to CFRA leave, that he availed himself of that right, and that he was terminated for taking such leave. Because the employee had viable claims for violation of the CFRA, it necessarily followed that a triable issue existed with respect to his cause of action for wrongful termination in violation of public policy. A triable issue also existed as to the cause of action for ...