Judge: Matthew C. Braner, Case: 37-2023-00047995-CU-WT-CTL, Date: 2024-03-15 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - March 14, 2024

03/15/2024  09:00:00 AM  C-60 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Matthew C. Braner

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Wrongful Termination Demurrer / Motion to Strike 37-2023-00047995-CU-WT-CTL AKOUBI VS THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Defendant The Regents of the University of California's demurrer is OVERRULED.

A demurrer may be sustained if the pleading 'does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.' (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).) To test the sufficiency of a cause of action, the court treats as true 'all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law.' (Centinela Freeman Emergency Medical Associates v. Health Net of California, Inc. (2016) 1 Cal.5th 994, 1010.) The court may also consider matters that have been judicially noticed. (Id.) It is not necessary to 'plead evidentiary facts supporting [an] allegation of ultimate fact,' and a pleading 'is adequate so long as it apprises the defendant of the factual basis for the claim.' (Birke v. Oakwood Worldwide (2009) 169 Cal.App.4th 1540, 1549.) In considering whether the complaint adequately states a claim, the court shall give the complaint a 'reasonable interpretation, reading it as a whole and its parts in their context.' (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) Defendant demurs to the second cause of action for hostile work environment under the Fair Employment and Housing Act on the basis that Plaintiff has failed to allege conduct that was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of his employment. Defendant contends that conduct such as Plaintiff's supervisor telling him, on a single occasion, that Plaintiff's use of the French language was 'improper' and 'full of mistakes,' coupled with allegations that his supervisor 'dropped-in' on Plaintiff's classes unannounced, engaged in disruptive behavior, and contradicted Plaintiff in front of his students, is insufficient as a matter of law to qualify as severe or pervasive. Plaintiff counters by emphasizing that harassment cases are rarely appropriate for disposition on demurrer or summary judgment, and that following the 2019 amendment to Government Code section 12923, even a single incident of harassing conduct may be sufficient to establish a triable issue of fact. Plaintiff also cites to the specific allegations of harassing conduct set forth in the complaint, including that his supervisor told him during a meeting on May 24, 2023 that the reason he would not be hired for the summer session was that she was looking for 'the better French.' (Complaint, ¶ 14.) The complaint sufficiently pleads a cause of action under Government Code section 12940, subdivision (j)(1). A claim of hostile work environment requires allegations that show: 1) Plaintiff is a member of a protected class; (2) Plaintiff was subjected to unwelcome harassment; (3) the harassment was based on his protected status; (4) the harassment unreasonably interfered with his work performance by creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment; and (5) defendants are liable for the harassment.

(Ortiz v. Dameron Hospital Assn. (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 568, 581.) The harassment must be 'severe or pervasive,' which is now defined as 'conduct [that] has unreasonably interfered with the plaintiff's work performance or created an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.' (Gov. Code, § 12923, Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3073579  17 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  AKOUBI VS THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA  37-2023-00047995-CU-WT-CTL subd. (b); see also Beltran v. Hard Rock Hotel Licensing, Inc. (2023) 97 Cal.App.5th 865, 878.) Whether a conduct is sufficiently harassing, which need only be a single instance of conduct, is measured by both an objective (judged from the perspective of a reasonable in Plaintiff's position) and subjective (Plaintiff's perceived the work environment to be hostile) standard. (Ortiz v. Dameron Hospital Assn., supra, 37 Cal.App.5th at p. 583.) Here, the complaint alleges that Plaintiff and his supervisor are native French speakers from different countries and his supervisor views French speakers from her own country (Belgium) as superior to French speakers from Plaintiff's country (Tunisia). (Complaint, ¶ 14.) As a result of this discriminatory animus related to Plaintiff's national origin, Plaintiff's supervisor made unannounced and disruptive visits to his classes that included leaving trash and talking down to Plaintiff in front of his students, gave him extra menial work while reducing his teaching schedule, belittled him at meetings, and made derogatory comments about how he spoke French. (Complaint, ¶¶ 11-14, 39.) A reasonable person in Plaintiff's position could perceive this conduct as sufficiently belittling and intimidating to interfere with his work performance, and Plaintiff has alleged he in fact perceived such conduct as harassing.

Thus, Plaintiff has alleged he is a member of a protected class via his national origin, that his supervisor harassed him because of his protected status, that such harassment significantly impacted his emotional wellbeing and work performance, thereby creating an intimidating and hostile work environment, and Defendant is liable for the harassment because Plaintiff's supervisor is its managing agent. Nothing more is required at this stage.

Accordingly, Defendant's demurrer is overruled.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3073579  17