RALPH COTRAN, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROLLINS HUDIG HALL INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al., Defendants and Appellants., 17 Cal. 4th 93

Summary

Two employees of defendant employer alleged that plaintiff employee sexually harassed them. After an investigation, plaintiff was terminated. Plaintiff filed suit against defendant alleging wrongful discharge. Defendant offered a defense based upon the fact that the decision to fire plaintiff had been reached honestly and in good faith. The trial court rejected this defense and instructed the jury that defendant could prevail only if the jury was satisfied that sexual harassment had actually occurred. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff. Defendant appealed and the court reversed the judgment and awarded a new trial. The court concluded that the jury should have been instructed that the question critical to defendants' liability was not whether plaintiff in fact sexually harassed other employees, but whether at the time the decision to terminate plaintiff's employment was made, defendants, acting in good faith and after an investigation that was appropriate under the ...