In November 2009, plaintiff Eun Joo Ko, a data entry clerk, buyer, and cashier at The Square Supermarket, was switched to a flat salary, although her duties and work hours remained the same. (She previously worked 60 or more hours per week as a non-exempt employee since June 2009.) In January 2012, Ko became seriously ill due to a kidney infection and could not work. As a result, she sought medical care from her primary care physician and was diagnosed with septic shock. Ko’s primary care physician ordered that Ko immediately go to a larger facility with emergency room care. While Ko was out on medical leave, she claimed the supermarket demanded she obtain a doctor’s note, which she did. However, the note she submitted had handwritten changes to the dates of leave. Ko claimed the supermarket rejected the first note and demanded a note from Kaiser within 48 hours. Subsequently, on Jan. 16, 2012, Ko was terminated from her position. Ko sued the operator of The Square Supermarket, Square Group, LLC. Ko alleged that the defendant’s actions constituted wrongful termination, disability discrimination, and failure to accommodate in violation of the Labor Code. She also alleged that the defendant’s actions constituted violations of the California Family Rights Act based on retaliation for taking medical leave and termination in violation of public policy. Ko contended that no one notified her of the deadline for the note from Kaiser or of the termination condition. She claimed that she was able to obtain the Kaiser note, which confirmed her condition and listed the same dates of leave as stated in the first doctor’s note, but that when she notified the supermarket about the new note from Kaiser, she was terminated anyway. Ko submitted deposition testimony wherein the supermarket admitted that it felt Ko was a “terrorist” because she missed work without the Kaiser note and that it wanted to make her an example for other workers to prohibit them from missing work. She further contended that she was improperly classified as an exempt employee in November 2009, when she was switched to a flat salary. Square Group claimed that Ko was terminated for other performance problems. Defense counsel contended that while Ko’s physician diagnosed her with the first stage of possible septic shock, Ko went to Kaiser a day later and was diagnosed with a urinary tract infection, a common and less serious condition. Counsel contended that while Ko testified at trial that at the time of her termination, she told her employer she had a doctor’s note, this testimony did not comport with her deposition testimony, where she stated that when she was informed of her termination, there was “no discussion.” Defense counsel further disputed that the supermarket characterized Ko as a “terrorist” for missing work. Specifically, counsel asserted that the owner of the supermarket’s testimony about Ko being a “terrorist” was mischaracterized when he stated that he took into consideration how Ko’s conduct affected other employees. In addition, defense counsel contended that Ko was promoted to manager and had supervisory duties and responsibilities over other employees at the market, so she was properly classified as an exempt employee., Ko claimed she suffered emotional distress as a result of her termination. She sought payment of unpaid overtime wages, missed meal and rest period wages, pay stub penalties, and waiting time penalties. Ko also sought recovery of punitive damages.