FACTS
Plaintiff Richard Walrath sued his former employer, Hatcher Press, Inc. and its president, Stephen Sprinkel, for wrongful termination, age discrimination in violation of the FEHA, retaliation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. In moving for summary judgment, Sprinkel conceded he was the plaintiff's supervisor. The trial court granted summary judgment in his favor.
DISCUSSION
The question on appeal was whether the plaintiff's cause of action for retaliation against Sprinkel was barred by Reno v. Baird, 18 Cal. 4th 640 (1998), which held that a supervisor could not be sued individually for discrimination in employment under the FEHA or under a common law cause of action for discharge in violation of the public policy expressed in the FEHA. The plaintiff argued Reno was not dispositive because it did not involve a cause of action for retaliation in violation of public policy. The Court of Appeal agreed.
The Court found Reno was distinguishable because it dealt only with claims for discrimination and not claims for retaliation, which falls under a different statutory provision. The Court pointed out the statutory language regarding discrimination differs from other prohibitions under the FEHA. Whereas the prohibition regarding discrimination applies only to "an employer" (Cal. Govt. Code § 12940 (a)), the prohibition against retaliation under the FEHA applies to "any employer, labor organization, employment agency, or person" (Govt. Code § 12940(h)). The Court held the reference to "person" indicates a legislative intent to allow individual liability for retaliatory acts by supervisors.
CONCLUSION
Reno v. Baird is not controlling as to a cause of action for retaliation and an individual supervisor may be liable for retaliation against an employee in violation of the FEHA.