A California court of appeal recently created a small but important loophole in the long-enforced presumption that partners do not enjoy protections under workplace anti-discrimination statutes. In Fitzsimons v. California Emergency Physicians Medical Group, 12 C.D.O.S. 5298, the First District Court of Appeal held that under the Fair Employment and Housing Act, a partner may assert a retaliation claim against her partnership for opposing the sexual harassment of an employee. Because she is not technically an employee of the partnership, a partner cannot sue for retaliation after reporting her own harassment, but the court allowed Fitzsimons’ claim because she complained about the harassment of the firm’s employees.
The Fitzsimons exception for such retaliation claims is the latest in a series of cracks in the traditional doctrine that protected partnerships from individual partners’ claims of discrimination. Because anti-discrimination statutes, like the FEHA and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, restrict the behavior of “employers,” partnerships have long been able to evade liability to their partners, who share in the ownership and control of a firm as an employer.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
