Nadaf-Rahrov v. Neiman Marcus Group CA1/5

**What Happened** An employee sued Neiman Marcus Group after being fired, claiming the company discriminated against them because of a disability. The worker argued that Neiman Marcus failed to provide reasonable accommodations for their disability and didn't properly discuss possible solutions with them (called the "interactive process"). The employee also claimed they were fired in retaliation for requesting these accommodations. **What the Court Decided** A jury sided with the employee, finding that Neiman Marcus had indeed discriminated based on disability. The appeals court upheld this decision and ordered the company to pay the employee's attorney fees. This confirmed that the employer violated California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) by not providing reasonable accommodations and failing to engage in good-faith discussions about possible solutions. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling reinforces that employers must take disability accommodation requests seriously. Companies cannot simply ignore requests or refuse to discuss options. When workers ask for reasonable accommodations, employers must engage in genuine conversations to find solutions. If employers fail to do this and fire the worker instead, they can face significant legal consequences including paying damages and attorney fees.