In February 2009, plaintiff Judy Siglin, 59, a third grade teacher employed at Carden Whittier School in Whittier, took a two-month medical leave of absence. Upon returning, she was not placed back in her classroom and, instead, was assigned the position of substitute/tutor. Siglin asked the school to be returned to her classroom, but claimed the school refused. On June 9, 2009, Siglin’s employment with school ended after 18 years as a second and third grade teacher. Siglin sued Carden Whittier School Inc. She alleged that the defendant’s actions constituted discrimination based on a perceived/actual disability, retaliation in violation of the California Family Rights Act, wrongful termination in violation of public policy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Siglin claimed that Carden Whittier discriminated and retaliated against her by refusing to return her to her third grade classroom and then subsequently terminating her employment. She claimed that this discrimination and retaliation was for her taking an approved medical leave of absence. Carden Whittier contended that Siglin was not discriminated against and that her employment was not terminated. Instead, it claimed that the plaintiff had an employment contract with the school and that her contract was not renewed at the end of the 2009 school year due to a downturn in the economy. However, Siglin claimed that no such employment contract existed, and that she was terminated because of the requested medical leave of absence and/or because of an actual or perceived disability., Siglin claimed that she suffered emotional distress as a result of the school refusing to return her to her third grade classroom and eventually terminating her. Thus, she sought recovery of an unspecified amount in damages for her pain and suffering. She also sought recovery of $97,500 in damages for her past lost earnings and an unspecified amount of damages for her future loss of earnings up until the age of 70. In addition, she sought recovery of punitive damages for the defendant’s malice, oppression and/or fraud. Defense counsel argued that Siglin was not wrongfully terminated and, therefore, was not owed damages for lost earnings or emotional distress.