On Sept. 20, 2011, plaintiff Ingrid Rider, an apartment manager in her late 20s who worked for Sire Enterprises, a small property management company, underwent emergency surgery due to an ectopic pregnancy. As a result, her treating physician ordered her to completely take off from work until Dec. 2, 2011, in order for her to recover from the physical effects of surgery and the emotional effects of losing her pregnancy. Subsequently, Rider was terminated from her position with Sire Enterprises Ltd. on Nov. 15, 2011, while she was still on pregnancy leave. Rider sued Sire Enterprises Ltd. for violations of the Pregnancy Disability Leave Law. Rider claimed that Sire Enterprises’ president, Steve Scarpa, thought that Rider was not really sick and fired her for not coming to work, even though the Pregnancy Disability Leave Law requires an employer to provide up to four months of leave from work for pregnancy-related disability and requires job reinstatement at the end of the leave. Plaintiff’s counsel noted that Scarpa testified that he thought she was a ‘scamming liar’ and that he hired someone to follow Rider around town. During this time, Rider was seen driving her preschool-age daughter to school and going out to dinner with coworkers one time. Scarpa also testified that he saw a picture in the paper of Rider sitting in the stands at the Cow Palace and concluded that she really could work. As a result, Scarpa asked for more information from the Rider’s physician about what activities Rider could not perform and the physician reiterated that she had ordered Rider to remain completely off work until Dec. 2, 2011. Thus, plaintiff’s counsel contended that Rider’s physician had not ordered Rider to remain housebound, so none of the observed activities violated the physician’s orders. Defense counsel contended that a few days after her surgery, Rider told her manager that she felt much better and would be returning to work in the next few weeks. Counsel also contended that during that phone call, Rider’s manager informed her that she had used up all of her sick and vacation time. In addition, counsel noted that on Sept. 24, 2011, Rider’s treating physician provided Rider with a note stating that she could return to work on Oct. 3, 2011. However, defense counsel contended that Rider did not provide the note to her employer and, instead, talked to her treating physician about applying for state disability benefits. Thus, counsel asserted that the treating physician asked Rider how long she would like to be off and prepared the certification necessary for Rider to receive state disability benefits a few days later, stating that Rider was experiencing 10-out-of-10 lower quadrant pain. However, defense counsel noted that during depositions both Rider and her treating physician conceded that Rider had not experienced 10-out-of-10 pain since before her surgery on Sept. 20, 2011. Thus, defense counsel asserted that following the discussion between the treating physician and Rider, the physician changed the medical record to show that Rider could not return to work until Dec. 2, 2011, and then provided Rider with a new note stating she couldn’t return to work until Dec. 2, 2011. Counsel noted that the note did not reference Rider’s surgery, but only stated that that Rider was seen in the OB/GYN clinic on Sept. 26, 2011, and could return to work without restriction on Dec. 2, 2011. Defense counsel asserted that Rider did not provide the note to her employer until late October 2011 and that by that time, Rider’s treating physician had removed any restrictions on Rider’s activities. As a result, Rider was observed camping at the Grand National Rodeo for the weekend and performing her regular activities, including riding her horse. Defense counsel contended that the Pregnancy Disability Leave Law allows employers to ask for medical certification that an employee is disabled as a result of pregnancy or a pregnancy-related condition. As a result, counsel contended that upon receipt of the doctor’s note dated Sept. 26, 2011, Sire Enterprises requested such certification from Rider’s treating physician, as well as certification of Rider’s functional limitations so that Sire Enterprises could make any necessary reasonable accommodations to enable her to return to work. However, counsel contended that the treating physician merely reiterated that Rider was unable to return to work until Dec. 2, 2011. Thus, defense counsel asserted that because of Rider’s failure to provide the required appropriate certification from her doctor, Sire Enterprises considered her absence unexcused and terminated her employment. Prior to trial, plaintiff’s counsel moved for summary adjudication of liability on the cause of action for violations of the Pregnancy Disability Leave Law, and it was granted. Rider also dismissed her wrongful termination cause of action without prejudice. Thus, the matter proceeded to trial on damages only., Rider claimed that she suffered emotional distress as a result of being fired while she was on pregnancy disability leave. She also claimed she suffered a loss of earnings as a result of the termination. Thus, Rider sought recovery of $250,000 in compensatory damages for her emotional distress and $36,000 in compensatory damages for her loss of earnings, as well as recovery of an unspecified amount of punitive damages as a result of Scarpa’s actions. Defense counsel did not dispute the amount of Rider’s wage loss. However, counsel did dispute the amount of distress alleged by Rider as a result of being followed and fired.