Husband v. Target Corporation

California Court of Appeal · 2026 · Published opinion (PDF)

Summary for general education only—not legal advice. This is not a Workplace Rights Advocacy case result. See Case Results for the firm’s own verdicts and settlements.

A California Court of Appeal decision about FEHA and mental disability. A Target employee had bipolar I disorder but did not tell any Target “official.” After two incidents of upsetting behavior, Target fired him under its workplace-violence policy. He sued for disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, and failure to engage in the interactive process. The trial court granted summary judgment for Target, and the Court of Appeal affirmed.

In plain English: the employer ordinarily must know you have a disabling condition before disability duties attach. Where you have not disclosed a diagnosis, courts ask whether a disability is the only fair reading of what the employer observed. Here, erratic behavior alone was not enough—stress, exhaustion, substances, and other causes could explain it. The opinion notes employees who need accommodations can disclose when medically appropriate; FEHA forbids retaliation for that disclosure.

← All law updates