Paleny v. Fireplace Products U.S., Inc., 103 Cal. App. 5th 199 (2024)

Erika Paleny alleged harassment, discrimination and retaliation after informing her manager that she would be undergoing oocyte retrieval procedures so she could donate and freeze her eggs for her potential use at some unknown time in the future. The trial court granted the employer’s motion for summary judgment on the ground that the egg retrieval and freezing procedures do not qualify as a “pregnancy-related medical condition or disability” and were therefore not protected by the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”). The Court of Appeal affirmed dismissal on summary judgment, holding that because Paleny was not pregnant or disabled by pregnancy or suffering from a medical condition related to pregnancy, she was not protected by FEHA.

[View source.]