In February 2012, plaintiff Doreen Martinez, a customer service representative at Warehouse Discount Center, was hospitalized with a septic kidney infection, which required the kidney to be surgically removed on April 27, 2012. Martinez, who had only worked for Warehouse Discount Center for approximately nine months before becoming ill, did not qualify for protected leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act or under California’s Moore-Brown-Roberti Family Rights Act. However, Warehouse Discount Center did allow six weeks of unpaid medical leave for employees not entitled to those statutory leaves, and Martinez was accordingly placed on the company’s six-week unpaid medical leave. When Martinez first became ill and was hospitalized for 10 days, her physician placed her off work. Her physician then extended the leave multiple times until it exceeded the six-week-leave allowance. After 7.5 weeks, Martinez’s physician provided another note extending the leave an additional month. Warehouse Discount Center claimed it had held Martinez’s position open for the 7.5 weeks, but could no longer do so because of the significant impact being shorthanded was having on the operations of the department. As a result, Warehouse Discount Center informed Martinez, by letter on April 3, 2012, that it could not accommodate her request for extra leave time due to the necessity of having to cover her duties and indicated that current business needs dictate that her position be filled. Warehouse Discount Center claimed it also advised and encouraged Martinez to contact it back to inquire about, or apply, for open positions once she was able to return to work. Martinez was then sent a “Change in Relationship” form, which advised her that her new relationship with the company was viewed as a leave of absence with an unknown return date. Martinez sued the operator of Warehouse Discount Center, TJS Enterprises Inc. Martinez alleged the company’s actions constituted disability discrimination, failure to reasonably accommodate her disability, and failure to engage in a good faith interactive process. Martinez claimed that she had been terminated by way of the April 3, 2012 letter and that upon receiving the letter prior to her April 27, 2012 surgery, while still on leave, she felt betrayed and decided not to contact Warehouse Discount Center when she was able to return to work once she was released to do so without any restrictions on June 16, 2012. TJS Enterprises maintained that there were open positions for Martinez in June 2012 and that Martinez would have been placed in one of those positions without any loss of time in service, and at the same pay, had she called., Martinez claimed she suffered emotional distress as a result of receiving the alleged termination letter prior to undergoing her kidney removal surgery. Thus, she sought recovery of up to $200,000 in emotional distress damages and approximately $18,000 in past lost wages. She also sought recovery of attorney’s fees. Defense counsel contested the amount of damages claimed by Martinez and denied Martinez suffered any damages at all. Notably, defense counsel argued that Martinez secured subsequent employment six months after she was released to return to work and that Martinez was earning more money now than she was at Warehouse Discount Center.