In April 2009, plaintiff Beverly Bernell Myres, 56, a workers’ compensation analyst for the San Francisco Housing Authority, injured her knee in a workplace accident. Following arthroscopic knee surgery in February 2010, Myres went on workers’ compensation leave and returned to half-duty work on May 19, 2010. However, she was terminated from employment three weeks later, in June 2010, along with 12 other employees. According to the Housing Authority, the terminations were the result of a restructuring of operations. Myres sued the San Francisco Housing Authority. Myres alleged that the Housing Authority failed to engage in the interactive process and failed to accommodate her. She also alleged that the Housing Authority’s actions constituted disability harassment/discrimination, retaliation and wrongful termination. Myres claimed that on May 13, 2010, prior to returning to work from her leave, she sent a notice to her employer about her work restrictions and, specifically, how she could not walk except for personal reasons. However, she claimed that upon returning to work, the Housing Authority failed to accommodate her requests and that during the three weeks before her termination, she was forced to walk back and forth from her desk several times a day to use the office copier and fax machine. Myres alleged that due to the constant walking, her other knee was injured and that on the day she returned to the doctor, she was terminated from her employment. Although she was terminated after returning to the doctor and requesting a second leave of absence, Myres claimed that she had actually been already targeted for layoff in or around March 2010, prior to returning to work after her initial leave of absence. Thus, she claimed she was fired in retaliation for going out on her initial protective leave. The Housing Authority denied all of Myres’ allegations, claiming that Myres’ workplace accommodations were granted upon her return from her initial leave, that she was not harmed by the minimal walking, and that she was hot harassed or discriminated against. It also claimed that Myres was laid off for legitimate business reasons and, hence, her termination was not a form of retaliation. The Housing Authority further claimed that the layoff notice was faxed to Myres’ union representative and mailed directly to Myres the day before she returned to her doctor., Myres claimed that since she was forced to walk back and forth from her desk several times a day after returning from medical leave, she attempted to compensate for her prior knee injury, resulting in a new injury her other knee. She also claimed that she suffered emotional distress as a result of the Housing Authority failing to make accommodations for her prior knee injury after she returned to work and as a result of her termination. Thus, Myres sought recovery of three years in back pay and seven years in future lost earnings, based on a base salary of $81,000. She also sought recovery of general damages for her emotional distress and pain and suffering. Defense counsel contended that Myres was laid off for legitimate business reasons and that the Housing Authority did not cause any of her alleged emotional distress or new knee injury.