Meredith Oliver v. Astrazeneca Pharmaceuticals Lp

MEMORANDUM

1.The district court properly granted summary judgment on Oliver’s claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and the California Family Rights Act (CFRA). Even drawing “all justifiable inferences” in Oliver’s favor, see Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 , 106 S.Ct. 2505 , 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986), she didn’t show that AstraZeneca was on notice that she was disabled, or even seriously ill, before it made the decision to fire her.

2. Oliver’s claim that her firing contravened public policy also fails. AstraZene-ca didn’t violate the ADA, FMLA, FEHA or CFRA. And even if Oliver was fired due to her investigation into Sophia Soler’s activities, Oliver doesn’t explain how her firing was contrary to a policy that is “fundamental,” “beneficial for the public” and “embodied in a statute or constitutional provision.” See Turner v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 7 Cal.4th 1238 , 32 Cal.Rptr.2d 223 , 876 P.2d 1022, 1032-33 (1994).

3. Oliver’s intentional infliction of emotional distress claim is preempted by the Workers’ Compensation Act because it is predicated on…