ALLISON LEE VS THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL.

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: *******6870 Hearing Date: May 13, 2022 Dept: 53

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles – Central District

Department 53

MOVING PARTIES: Defendant Rita Jue Quan

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Allison Lee

Demurrer to First Amended Complaint

The court considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers filed in connection with the demurrer.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Allison Lee (“Plaintiff”) filed this action on May 4, 2021. On September 27, 2021, Plaintiff filed her operative First Amended Complaint against defendants The Regents of the University of California, Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, University of California Los Angeles, and Rita Jue Quan.[1] Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint alleges eight causes of action for (1) disability discrimination in violation of FEHA; (2) disability harassment in violation of FEHA; (3) failure to provide reasonable accommodation in violation of FEHA; (4) failure to engage in the interactive process; (5) retaliation for engaging in a protected activity in violation of FEHA; (6) failure to prevent discrimination, harassment, and retaliation in violation of FEHA; (7) violation of Labor Code section 1102.5; and (8) intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Defendant Rita Jue Quan (“Defendant”) demurs to Plaintiff’s second cause of action for disability harassment and eighth cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress.

DEMURRER

The court sustains Defendant’s demurrer to the second cause of action for disability harassment in violation of FEHA because Plaintiff has not alleged (1) conduct constituting actionable harassment, instead alleging that Defendant made personnel decisions or (2) conduct demonstrating that the claimed harassing conduct was based on her disability. (Janken v. GM Hughes Electronics (1996) 46 Cal.App.4th 55, 64-65 [making a personnel decision, including a performance evaluation, is conduct of a type fundamentally different from the type of conduct that constitutes harassment].) Plaintiff has therefore failed to allege facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (Code Civ. Proc., 430.10, subd. (e).)

The court sustains Defendant’s demurrer to the eighth cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress because the claim is barred by the workers’ compensation exclusivity doctrine and therefore fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (Code Civ. Proc., 430.10, subd. (e).) In support of this cause of action, Plaintiff has alleged certain kinds of conduct (namely, Defendant’s criticism of her performance and accusation that she mis-delivered medication while working) that is considered to be “a normal part of the employment relationship” and therefore “covered by the workers’ compensation exclusivity provisions.” (Shoemaker v. Myers (1990) 52 Cal.3d 1, 25.)

The court also sustains Defendant’s demurrer to the eighth cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress because Plaintiff has failed to allege extreme and outrageous conduct by Defendant. (Hughes v. Pair (2009) 46 Cal.4^th 1035, 1050.) Plaintiff has therefore not alleged facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (Code Civ. Proc., 430.10, subd. (e).)

ORDER

The court sustains Defendant’s demurrer to the second cause of action for disability harassment in violation of FEHA. (Code Civ. Proc., 430.10, subd. (e).)

The court sustains Defendant’s demurrer to the eighth cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. (Code Civ. Proc., 430.10, subd. (e).)

The court grants Plaintiff leave to file a second amended complaint that amends the second and eighth causes of action within 20 days of the date of this order.

The court orders defendant Rita Jue Quan to give notice of this ruling.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 13, 2022

Robert B. Broadbelt III

Judge of the Superior Court

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases

---

Latest cases where RONALD REAGAN UCLA MEDICAL CENTER 6ICU is a litigant

ESTATE OF ERIKA DENISE MURCIA, ET AL. VS RONALD REGAN UCLA MEDICAL CENTER, ET AL.

Los Angeles County Superior Courts | Personal Injury | 22STCV07621 | 2022-03-02

---

Tarren Clark v. Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center et al

U.S. District Courts | Civil Right | 2:21-CV-09569 | 2021-12-10

---

KAROLAN PALACIOS VS THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL.

Los Angeles County Superior Courts | Labor | 20STCV17731 | 2020-05-08

Latest cases where THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA A PUBLIC ENTITY is a litigant

Caughey vs. The Regents of the University

Ventura County Superior Courts | Personal Injury | 56-2022-00565827-CU-MM-VTA | 2022-05-17

---

DION RAYMOND VS REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

Los Angeles County Superior Courts | Labor | 22STCV14982 | 2022-05-05

---

PATRICK CHUNG VS. THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

Orange County Superior Courts | Labor | 30-2022-01257774-CU-WT-CJC | 2022-05-03

Latest cases represented by Lawyer MILLER JONATHAN DENGLER

LACK VS CITY OF ORINDA

Contra Costa County Superior Courts | Personal Injury | CIVMSC19-02385 | 2019-11-14

---

RUSTY RENDON, AN INDIVIDUAL VS RUBY TUESDAY, INC., A GEORGIA CORPORATION

Los Angeles County Superior Courts | Civil Right | 19STCV38752 | 2019-10-29

---

Doe VS Regents of the University of California

Alameda County Superior Courts | Other | HG18916237 | 2018-08-10