In January 2013, Rosi Godinez, 51, a quality assurance lab technician for Alta-Dena Certified Dairy, LLC, provided a doctor’s note to her employer, informing Alta-Dena that she needed a temporary accommodation for her disability involving her knees and ankles. She began experiencing problems with her knees and ankles in 2012 and by January 2013, she asked for an accommodation that involved limited standing and walking until March 3, 2013. Alta-Dena then sent Godinez to its own doctor for a fitness-for-duty examination and that doctor verified the need for the accommodation, as well as verified that Godinez was “able to perform the essential functions” of the job. As a result, Alta-Dena allowed Godinez to work with the temporary physical restrictions. In February 2013, Godinez complained to Alta-Dena management, including a manager and Human Resources Manager Maria Flores, that the company was not accommodating her disability-related physical restrictions and asked if she could change shifts or modify her work schedules. However, when Alta-Dena could not accommodate her, Godinez went out on disability by obtaining a doctor’s note placing her off-work and provided it to Alta-Dena. In approximately August 2013, Godinez once again gave verbal and written notice to Flores that she could work with some disability-related physical restrictions. Godinez claimed that she could work as a Lab Tech with the restrictions specified by her doctor, but Alta-Dena informed her that it would make a determination if it would allow her to return to work with her physical restrictions. Flores handled Alta-Dena’s response to Godinez’s request to work with some physical restrictions and decided that the manager who Godinez previously informed and who worked outside of Human Resources would decide if Godinez’s restrictions prevented her from working as a Lab Tech. However, the manager and a Quality Assurance manager ultimately concluded that Godinez could not perform the physical restrictions of the job. As a result, Godinez was terminated from her job on Oct. 31, 2013. Godinez sued Alta-Dena Certified Dairy, LLC, and Maria Flores. Godinez alleged that the defendants’ actions constituted wrongful termination and violations of the Fair Employment and Housing Act, including disability discrimination, failure to engage in the interactive process, failure to provide reasonable accommodations, failure to prevent discrimination, and wrongful termination in violation of public policy. Godinez claimed that, in February 2013, when she complained to Flores and the Alta-Dena manager that Alta-Dena was not accommodating her disability-related physical restrictions and asked if she could change shifts or modify work schedules, she was told that they were “short on people” because Lab Techs were on vacation and that “there was no way to accommodate [her] restrictions.” She claimed that as a result, they told her that she needed to “go on disability.” Godinez contended that Alta-Dena had the ability to employ temporary labor to help perform Lab Tech duties and that it could modify work schedules, but that neither option was taken. She claimed that because Alta-Dena refused to accommodate her restrictions and instructed her to “go on disability”, she obtained a doctor’s note placing her off-work and provided it to Alta-Dena. Godinez claimed that when she once again gave verbal and written notice to Flores that she could work with some disability-related physical restrictions in around August 2013, she knew that since she had previously performed the position for 33 years, she could work as a Lab Tech with restrictions, but that Alta-Dena informed her that it would make its own determination. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that Flores handled Alta-Dena’s response to Godinez’s request to work with some physical restrictions, but that at that time, Flores had never taken any courses pertaining to the interactive process or disability accommodation. Counsel also contended that Flores had only engaged in the interactive process once before in her entire life and that on that occasion, Flores couldn’t find an accommodation and the Alta-Dena employee was fired. Counsel further contended that Flores never worked as a Lab Tech or in any production position at Alta-Dena, so she decided the manager who worked outside of Human Resources would decide if Godinez’s restrictions prevented her from working as a Lab Tech. However, plaintiff’s counsel contended that the manager also had never been a Lab Tech or had ever supervised that position, and that the manager’s only first-hand audit of the time and duties of the Lab Tech position was watching a Lab Tech work in the lab for one hour. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that as a result, Flores met with the manager in September 2013 to give him the assignment and told the manager, “This is the position. These are the restrictions. We need to see, can the work get done.” Counsel asserted that Flores allegedly told the manager that he could use a Quality Assurance manager as a “resource,” but the QA manager, at that time, had held her position for only a few months and the only time she worked full-time as a Lab Tech was for two weeks at an entirely different facility. Thus, plaintiff’s counsel argued that the persons at Alta-Dena who concluded Godinez could not perform the physical restrictions of the job had never themselves performed the Lab Tech job and both admitted that they never considered whether Godinez could perform her duties with accommodation. In addition, Godinez claimed that she could perform the job with, or without, accommodation with the restrictions imposed by her doctor. Alta-Dena claimed that it fired Godinez because it concluded that she couldn’t perform the Lab Tech job with the physical restrictions provided by her doctor., Godinez was employed with Alta-Dena Certified Dairy, LLC since 1979, when she was in high school. She held the same QA Lab Tech position throughout her employment. Godinez contended this was the only job she’s ever held in her adult life. Thus, she claimed she suffered emotional distress as a result of the termination.