On Jan. 14, 2013, plaintiff Jacqueline Gantner, a brand representative for Lemonade Restaurant Group, LLC, was terminated from her employment. Gantner was previously hired to work as a store level manager at a number of Lemonade Restaurants in around 2009. She thereafter worked in various capacities, including being assigned duties as a corporate catering manager in 2012. Gantner was then assigned to work as Lemonade Restaurant Group’s brand representative at a lemonade restaurant located at Los Angeles International Airport. Shortly thereafter, she was terminated on Jan. 14, 2013. Gantner claimed that she was terminated as a result of gender and disability discrimination and in retaliation for making complaints about the wrongful conduct. Gantner sued Lemonade Restaurant Group, LLC, alleging gender discrimination, pregnancy discrimination, disability discrimination, retaliation, and wrongful termination. Gantner also sued Ian Olsen, Michelle Kroeger, Alan Jackson, and Crews Enterprises Inc. and Crews of California Inc. (which were substituted in for “Doe” defendants). However, they were ultimately dismissed from the case, and the matter continued against Lemonade Restaurant Group only. Gantner contended that her termination occurred shortly after she had learned that she was pregnant and had advised her employer of that fact. She also contended that she was retaliated against for making complaints about Lemonade Restaurant Group’s wrongful conduct with respect to the manner in which its employees were compensated and being mistreated. Thus, she claimed she was discriminated against due to her gender and pregnancy, and was wrongfully terminated as a result of her disability and complaints about improper wages. Defense counsel argued that after being assigned duties as corporate catering manager in 2012, Gantner failed to perform her duties adequately, resulting in numerous performance deficiencies. Counsel argued that rather than terminate Gantner’s employment in October 2012, Lemonade Restaurant Group gave Gantner a final opportunity to perform in a new position and assigned her to work as a brand representative at the LAX lemonade restaurant. However, counsel contended that the LAX restaurant was owned and operated by separate company that is a licensee of the Lemonade brand. Thus, defense counsel contended that Gantner, while still an employee of Lemonade Restaurant Group, was to perform services under a consulting agreement between Lemonade Restaurant Group and the separate company that owned and operated the LAX lemonade restaurant. However, defense counsel argued that after a number of performance issues were noted by the separate company, it ultimately terminated the consulting agreement under which Gantner was working. Thus, counsel contended that after the termination of the consulting agreement, Lemonade Restaurant Group terminated Gantner’s employment., Gantner sought recovery of past and future lost earnings. She also sought recovery of non-economic damages and punitive damages.