Skip to main content

George v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

Cal. Ct. App.December 9, 2009No. F055385Cited 27 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Wiseman
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
jury verdict

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

RetaliationDiscrimination

Outcome

Jury found the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board unlawfully retaliated against employee Cynthia George for filing a gender discrimination complaint, awarding $100,000 in damages plus $391,755 in attorney fees. Court affirmed judgment, holding that res judicata does not bar an employee from pursuing both administrative civil service remedies and FEHA claims.

What This Ruling Means

**George v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board: Employee Wins Retaliation Case** This case involved Cynthia George, an employee at the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, who filed a gender discrimination complaint against her employer. After she made this complaint, George claimed her employer retaliated against her for speaking up about discrimination. The jury sided with George, finding that the state agency did indeed unlawfully punish her for filing the discrimination complaint. They awarded her $100,000 in damages for the retaliation, plus an additional $391,755 to cover her attorney fees. When the employer appealed, the higher court upheld the jury's decision. An important legal issue was resolved in this case: the court confirmed that employees can pursue multiple avenues for justice when facing workplace discrimination and retaliation. Specifically, workers can file complaints through both their employer's internal civil service process and also pursue separate legal action under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). This ruling matters for workers because it establishes that filing one type of complaint doesn't prevent you from seeking justice through other legal channels. It also demonstrates that retaliation for reporting discrimination can result in significant financial consequences for employers.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.