Lyle v. WARNER BROTHERS TELEVISION PRODUCTION
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- George (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
16 Cal.Rptr.3d 331 (2004) 94 P.3d 476 LYLE v. WARNER BROTHERS TELEVISION PRODUCTION et al.
No. S125171. Supreme Court of California.
July 21, 2004. Mark Weidmann, Attorney at Law, Los Angeles, CA, for plaintiff and appellant.
Adam Levin, Mitchell Silberberg et al., Los Angeles, CA, for defendant and respondent.
Petition for review granted; issues limited.
Respondents' petition for review GRANTED.
Appellant's petition for review denied.
The issues to be briefed and argued are limited to the following issues: (1) Can the use of sexually coarse and vulgar language in the workplace constitute harassment based on sex within the meaning of the Fair Employment & Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov.Code, § 12900 et seq.)? (2) Does the potential imposition of liability under FEHA for sexual harassment based on such speech infringe on defendants' rights of free speech under the First Amendment or the state Constitution?
GEORGE, C.J., KENNARD, BAXTER, WERDEGAR, CHIN, BROWN, and MORENO, JJ., concur.
Cites, in this corpus
- In Re Lucas S050142 · 2004-07-26