The uncontested facts in Anthony v. Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, Wireless, recount what must have been a very memorable company dinner.
According to the facts recited in the case, the plaintiff, who was employed by Verizon as an Operations Manager, drank two beers before attending a company-sponsored dinner. During the event, the plaintiff continued drinking martinis until he was cut off after becoming intoxicated. Thereafter, the plaintiff took food out of his mouth and threw it at other people, including the pregnant spouse of a supervisor; he made inappropriate noises and comments, including barking and growling; he inappropriately touched his supervisor; he leaned toward his supervisor and fell out of his chair; he became unconscious at the table; and he "urinated in the public parking lot and ... on a Verizon Wireless supervisor."
The following day, the plaintiff went to the doctor complaining of "fatigue" and a blood test revealed THC in his system. He was diagnosed with alcohol and marijuana consumption and, not surprisingly, a "hangover."
When the plaintiff returned to work the following Monday, he tried to limit the damage. He sent an e-mail apologizing for his behavior, claiming he "may have ingested something." He also apologized in person for throwing food at his supervisor's pregnant wife and for inappropriately touching a second supervisor.
In response to the incident, Verizon’s human resources personnel conducted an investigation. Approximately three weeks later, the employee delivered a doctor's note to Verizon stating he must participate "in a modified work program" for six months. Verizon terminated the plaintiff five days later.
The plaintiff sued Verizon alleging disability discrimination and failure to accommodate in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), violation of the California Family Rights Act (CFRA), wrongful termination, and retaliation. The plaintiff alleged that he suffered from anxiety, depression and bipolar disorder, and that he was drugged with marijuana, which might have triggered his symptoms and led to his egregious behavior.
The trial court rejected all of the plaintiff’s claims and granted summary judgment to the employer. According to the court, the plaintiff failed to prove that he was disabled within the meaning of the law, or even that he was drugged or that marijuana consumption was capable of triggering his symptoms. He also failed to produce any evidence that he was diagnosed with bipolar disorder, as alleged. The court also noted that the plaintiff did not controvert the employer's evidence that his deplorable conduct at the company dinner was the result of alcohol consumption.