A former employee's lawsuit against a major healthcare provider has been dismissed, marking a significant legal victory for the company. On January 6, 2023, Jayson Jordan filed an appeal in the Court of Appeal of the State of California, Second Appellate District, Division Five, challenging a summary judgment granted by the Superior Court of Los Angeles County in favor of Molina Healthcare, Inc.
Jordan's lawsuit stemmed from his termination by Molina Healthcare on January 22, 2019. He alleged that his firing was due to his physical disability and that it violated California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). According to court documents, Jordan had been employed with Molina for over 13 years as a junior analyst when he injured his back in August 2018. This injury led to medical leave and short-term disability benefits approved through November 14, 2018. However, after this period ended, Jordan did not communicate with either Molina or its third-party benefits administrator, The Hartford (Hartford), to request an extension of his medical leave.
In a series of communications from November to December 2018 and January 2019, Hartford repeatedly asked Jordan to provide updated medical information to support an extension of his leave. Despite these requests and notifications from both Hartford and Molina’s human resources department, Jordan failed to submit the necessary documentation. On January 17 and again on January 18, Todd Sheets from Molina’s HR department sent emails urging Jordan to provide the required paperwork or risk job abandonment under company policy.
Jordan contended that he was unable to return to work due to his ongoing disability and believed that Dr. Darryl Jacobs, who was treating him for spinal injuries, had submitted the necessary documentation. However, Dr. Jacobs testified that he never received such a request from Jordan nor submitted any paperwork extending Jordan’s leave beyond November 14.
The trial court found no evidence supporting Jordan's claims of unlawful discrimination or retaliation by Molina Healthcare. It ruled that Jordan's termination was based on neutral grounds—specifically his failure to return to work after his approved leave expired—and not because of any discriminatory intent related to his disability.
In affirming the trial court's decision on appeal, Judge Robert B. Broadbelt noted that "Molina demonstrated a legitimate reason for terminating Jordan," which was "for failing to show up for work following the end of his approved medical leave." The appellate court also agreed with this assessment upon de novo review.
Jordan sought various forms of relief including damages for wrongful termination in violation of public policy; discrimination based on disability; retaliation; failure to prevent discrimination; failure to provide reasonable accommodation; and failure to engage in a good faith interactive process. However, all these claims were dismissed as unfounded by both the trial court and appellate court.
Representing Jayson Jordan were attorneys Dilip M. Vithlani from Law Offices of Dilip Vithlani and Jonathan J. Moon from The Law Office of Jonathan J. Moon. Defending Molina Healthcare were Al M. De La Cruz, Christine La Vorgna and Mark R. Wilson from Manning & Kass Ellrod Ramirez Trester LLP.