Shoemaker

INTRODUCTION

The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) offered one of its officers, who had injured his knee on the job, a choice of light-duty assignments while he rehabilitated but told him no position was available to accommodate his temporary disability at his current location. Informed by others that jobs were available at his location, which he preferred, the officer sued the City of Los Angeles for disability discrimination, retaliation, failure to reasonably accommodate and failure to engage in a good faith interactive process in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code,1 § 12940 et seq.). The trial court granted the City’s motion for summary judgment. Because triable issues of material fact existed about whether the City violated its obligation to participate in the interactive process in good faith by misrepresenting the availability of light- duty assignments for which the officer was qualified, we reverse the order granting summary judgment. But we affirm the order granting summary adjudication of the remaining three causes of action.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. The Parties and the Previous Lawsuit Jeffrey Shoemaker had been a…