Yanowitz

Yanowitz v. L'OREAL USA, INC.

Good Law
106 Cal. App. 4th 1036·131 Cal. Rptr. 2d 575
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 11, 2003A095474California11,509 words

Opinion

Opinion

Certified for Partial Publication. [*]

Plaintiff Elysa J. Yanowitz was a regional sales manager for defendant L'Oreal USA, Inc. (L'Oreal), a cosmetics and fragrance company. A male L'Oreal executive ordered Yanowitz to fire a female employee in her region because the executive found the employee insufficiently attractive. Yanowitz was asked to get him someone "hot" instead. She asked for a better reason. The executive and another executive, who was Yanowitz's immediate supervisor, subjected her to heightened scrutiny and increasingly hostile evaluations over the ensuing months. Within four months, Yanowitz went on stress leave, and her position was eventually filled.

Yanowitz brought suit under the Fair Employment and Housing Act, charging L'Oreal with unlawful retaliation, and presented evidence that, if believed, would demonstrate the conduct described. The trial court granted summary judgment, finding that Yanowitz had not engaged in any protected activity. We reverse.

A male executive's order to fire a female employee because she fails to meet the executive's standards for sexual attractiveness is an act of sex discrimination when no similar standards are…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.