In 2008, plaintiff Jeff Belaire, 54, a United Parcel Service employee for over 33 years, was transferred to a new position as an operations center manager at the southeast California district. He claimed that after starting at the new facility, the package operations manager, Nick Kochek, began verbally and physically harassing him. Belaire claimed that he developed chest pain in the shower one day, which worsened before getting to work, causing him to go to the emergency room. He was subsequently diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, causing him to follow up with a psychologist and go out on disability leave in late 2008. Belaire continued to receive counseling until April 2009, when he attempted to return to work under his psychologist’s request that he no longer work under or with Kochek. Belaire also requested an accommodation to reduce his work day to 11 hours maximum (including travel). However, he claimed his accommodations were not met and, instead, he was offered a demotion to supervisor on June 30, 2009, on a shift that included evening hours. Belaire claimed the position offered had a reduction in salary, while still possessing the same essential job functions as his prior position. Upon being offered the supervisor position, Belaire claimed he had a relapse and went back to his psychologist on July 1, 2009, which led to him going back on disability leave. He then received a notice from UPS that month, which stated that he would lose his benefits if he did not return to work within one year of initiating his initial leave of absence. Thereafter, his psychologist released Belaire to return to work and upon doing so, Belaire was offered a part-time position working 27.5 hours a week, in which Belaire claimed he would lose all his benefits and stock options. He ultimately accepted the position and retired at the age of 55, receiving a retirement package based upon the highest continuous five years of salary earned in the previous 10 years. Belaire sued Kochek, United Parcel Service Inc., and his immediate supervisor at the southeast district, Leroy Stampley. He alleged that the defendants’ failure to accommodate, failure to engage in the interactive process and wrongful demotion constituted disability discrimination. Kochek was dismissed from the case on a granted motion for summary judgment, while Stampley was voluntarily discontinued from the case. The court also granted summary adjudication for UPS, as to Belaire’s other claims for harassment, retaliation, failure to take immediate corrective action, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, disparate impact, wrongful constructive termination, failure to prevent discrimination and harassment, and unfair business practices. The remaining causes of action proceeded to trial against UPS only. Belaire claimed that upon returning from his first disability leave in April 2009, UPS failed to accommodate his requests for restricted daytime hours and instead demoted him to a position that reduced his salary from $8,500 to $7,000 a month, while still having the same work functions. He further claimed that after his relapse, he was forced to ultimately retire when he was demoted to part-time employment, since his benefits would have been cut in half had he stayed until the age of 65, as he intended. UPS contended that at all times it complied with the law. Specifically, it claimed that upon Belaire’s release to return to work, it engaged the plaintiff in the interactive process, in good faith, to identify a reasonable accommodation. UPS claimed that as a result, it offered Belaire a reasonable accommodation in June 2009, but that Belaire’s response was to decline the offer and resume a leave of absence. UPS claimed that upon Belaire’s subsequent release to return to work in September 2009, it again engaged the plaintiff in the interactive process, in good faith, to identify a reasonable accommodation, and that Belaire accepted the reasonable accommodation that was offered and conceded that the position met his restrictions. Accordingly, UPS claimed it met its obligation to engage in the interactive process and to provide Belaire with a reasonable accommodation in accordance with the law., Belaire sought recovery of damages for his lost earnings and benefits for the 10 additional years he wanted to remain employed with UPS before retiring at age 65. In addition, he sought recovery of damages for his pain and suffering, specifically for the anxiety that left him disabled for several months following his attempt to return to the workplace, as well as for the loss of “identity” as a UPS manager, which he testified defined who he was and his value as an employee. Belaire claimed he remained under the care of a psychiatrist and psychologist for almost a year as a result of the conduct of UPS. Prior to trial, Judge David Chaffee struck the plaintiff’s claim for punitive damages, making statements regarding a “weak” case for said damages. Defense counsel argued that Belaire was not entitled to any damages as UPS, at all times, met its obligations under law.