On Nov. 15, 2013, plaintiff Rosa Jensen, 55, a sales associate, was terminated by her employer, a Home Depot retail store located in Hemet. Jensen had suffered an injury of her back in 1988. On July 23, 2010, she suffered an injury at work, but she was able to continue to working at Home Depot until she underwent carpal tunnel surgery on May 31, 2012. She underwent shoulder surgery on Feb. 20, 2013. Jensen claimed that she could have returned to the job that she had been doing for two years after her work-related injury, up until the time of surgery, and that she requested accommodations to return to various positions. Home Depot claimed that, because of Jensen’s restrictions, there was no position available for her to work. Jensen sued Home Depot; its parent company, Home Depot U.S.A. Inc.; and her supervisors, Jen Greenman, Karen Abraham and Theresa Meza. The lawsuit alleged that the defendants’ actions constituted disability discrimination, a failure to accommodate and wrongful termination. In a separate filing, another former Home Depot employee, Linda Kerr, sued Home Depot and Home Depot U.S.A. Inc.. The lawsuit alleged wrongful termination. The lawsuits were consolidated, but Kerr’s counsel negotiated a pretrial settlement of Kerr’s claim. The Home Depot, Greenman, Abraham and Meza were dismissed, and the matter proceeded to a trial that addressed Jensen’s claims against Home Depot U.S.A. Jensen’s counsel contended that Jensen’s supervisors ignored the fact that Jensen’s restrictions were lightened in November 2012 and refused to engage in a good faith interactive process with Jensen to determine if she could return to work. Jensen’s counsel contended that, instead, the supervisors told Jensen that her position had been eliminated and that they could not return her to any position, without ever having engaged in the interactive process. Defense counsel contended that the supervisors engaged in the interactive process numerous times and provided Jensen reasonable accommodations throughout most of her employment. Defense counsel noted that, during Jensen’s employment, she had three workplace that resulted in permanent work restrictions, including no pushing, pulling, bending, squatting, tugging, or lifting more than 10 pounds. Defense counsel further noted that Jensen’s work restrictions also included that she had to sit, stand and walk in 15 minute rotations and that she could not stand more than 30 minutes. Defense counsel also noted that Jensen’s restrictions included no forceful gripping or grasping, no overhead work, and no lifting objects weighing more than 20 pounds. Defense counsel contended that Jensen’s supervisors held several interactive process meetings with Jensen to discuss Jensen’s work restrictions and that they provided reasonable accommodations, consisting of assigning Jensen to a sedentary phone center sales associate position and providing extended leaves of absence. Defense counsel contended that after the surgeries, there was no position for Jensen to return to with her restrictions and that Jensen was kept on an extended leave of absence for 14 months as an accommodation, but that the phone center sales associate position was eliminated at the end of the 14 months. Defense counsel claimed that Jensen was unable to perform the essential functions of any position in the retail store, given the totality of Jensen’s permanent work restrictions. Defense counsel also noted that Jensen was told that she remained eligible for rehire if her condition changed., Jensen worked at various jobs for Home Depot for 26 years before being fired. She claimed that after her termination, she was unable to find work in retail, so she began taking care of elderly people in their home and transporting elderly patients to their doctors’ appointments, causing her to drive hundreds of miles a day. She claimed that she was paid a fraction of the money she made at Home Depot, but that it was the only work she could find. Jensen’s counsel contended that the case was litigated for six years and that, during that time, Jensen persevered through the possibly of losing her home multiple times. Jensen’s counsel noted that once litigation was filed, Home Depot offered Jensen her job back, but she declined. Jensen sought recovery of $338,201 in past loss of earnings; $99,674 in future loss of earnings; $279,829,000 in loss of retirement and taxes; $2,044,224 in damages for her past mental suffering, depression and anxiety; and $1,205,207 in damages for her future mental suffering, depression and anxiety. She also sought recovery of punitive damages. Defense counsel argued that Jensen failed to mitigate her damages because she did not find a job other than part-time employment.