On Aug. 18, 2009, plaintiff Cheryl Hightower-Brown, 32, was terminated from her warehouse attendant position with Ford Motor Co.’s parts distribution center in Manteca. Hightower-Brown alleged that she faxed a doctor’s note for disability leave and kept the transmission verification, as Ford had instructed her to do. She claimed that Ford failed to accommodate her disability with a leave of absence, and failed to engage in a good faith interactive process for accommodation, resulting in an unfair termination of employment. She also alleged discrimination, retaliation, harassment, and fraud. Hightower-Brown sued Ford Motor Co. and two individual Ford employees, plaintiff’s former supervisor, Rachel Varias, and a former Human Resources representative, April Thomas. Hightower-Brown’s original complaint included 12 causes of action against the defendants. However, Varias was granted summary judgment prior to trial and three claims were dropped voluntarily by the plaintiff or by non-suit during trial. As a result, the claims that went to the jury were regarding disability discrimination, failure to provide reasonable accommodation, failure to engage in the good faith interactive process, retaliation in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act, and failure to prevent harassment and discrimination against Ford only. The remaining four claims were regarding a hostile work environment due to harassment based on disability, negligent misrepresentation, intentional misrepresentation, and concealment against Ford and its Human Resources associate, Thomas. Hightower-Brown claimed that Ford discriminated against her and failed to accommodate an alleged mental disability by refusing to extend her leave of absence, which, at the time of termination, had already lasted for approximately 16 months. Ford contended that it had legitimate business reasons to terminate Hightower-Brown. It claimed that it had repeatedly allowed Hightower-Brown to extend her leave of absence, but that her leave of absence had expired without her either returning to work or her submitting a request for a further leave of absence. Thus, defense counsel argued that, in terminating Hightower-Brown, Ford was following the terms of its Collective Bargaining Agreement with the United Auto Workers union., Hightower-Brown claimed she suffered emotional distress as a result of the termination. The plaintiff’s expert economist testified that Hightower-Brown suffered economic damages in the amount of $645,000. Thus, Hightower-Brown sought recovery of her economic damages and an unspecified amount for emotional distress damages and for punitive damages. Defense counsel argued that any emotional distress alleged was the result of pre-existing conditions and alternate stressors not related to Hightower-Brown’s employment at Ford.