Harris v. City of Santa Monica

In Harris v. City of Santa Monica (2013) 56 Cal.4th 203, the Supreme Court held that a plaintiff who proves discrimination is nevertheless not entitled to damages where the employer proves it would have made the same decision without any discrimination. (Id. at p. 232.) The Court noted, however, that a plaintiff in such a case may still be entitled to other relief, such as declaratory or injunctive relief, e.g., "a judicial declaration of employer wrongdoing" or "injunctive relief . . . to stop discriminatory practices." (Id. at p. 234.) The Court then stated that a plaintiff who has proven discrimination may also be eligible for "'reasonable attorney's fees and costs,'" which "fulfills the objectives of FEHA" by compensating the plaintiff and her counsel for bringing a meritorious discrimination claim. (Ibid.)