California Medical Condition Discrimination Lawyer: Cancer, Genetic Information, and FEHA Protection Without a Disability Threshold

HOME › CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT LAW › WORKPLACE DISCRIMINATION › MEDICAL CONDITION DISCRIMINATION

Last updated: April 2026 — Reflects California Government Code §§ 12926(i), 12940(a), 12940(e), 12940(j), California Civil Code § 56.20 medical information confidentiality provisions, the federal Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) of 2008, and SB 523 adding reproductive health decisionmaking to FEHA protected categories in effect as of January 1, 2026

California medical condition discrimination cases under the Fair Employment and Housing Act are among the most powerful protected-class claims in American employment law because of a distinctive statutory feature: medical condition claims under Government Code § 12926(i) require no proof that the condition limits a major life activity. This eliminates the most common defense employers raise in disability discrimination cases.

A cancer survivor who is fully recovered and unaffected by current limitations — but who faces adverse employment action because of the cancer history — can prevail on a FEHA medical condition claim without the evidentiary burden that disability discrimination would impose.

The legal framework has two distinct FEHA pathways for health-related discrimination. Disability discrimination under § 12940(a) and § 12926 covers physical and mental disabilities that limit major life activities and requires the employee to prove the limitation.

Medical condition discrimination under § 12926(i) covers a narrower category — cancer and cancer history plus genetic characteristics — but without any threshold requirement. For cancer patients, cancer survivors, and employees with genetic predispositions, the medical condition framework provides direct and unqualified FEHA protection.

This guide covers the California medical condition discrimination framework under FEHA, the specific § 12926(i) definition covering cancer and genetic characteristics, the distinction from disability discrimination, the interaction with the federal Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), employer medical inquiry restrictions, confidentiality obligations, damages, and procedural steps.

For the broader disability discrimination framework requiring proof of limitation, see our California Disability Discrimination guide. For reproductive health decision-making protection, see our California Sex and Gender Discrimination guide.

What Is Medical Condition Discrimination Under California FEHA

Government Code § 12940(a) makes it unlawful for a California employer of five or more employees to refuse to hire, discharge, or otherwise discriminate against a person in compensation or in terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of medical condition. The statute covers applicants, probationary employees, and regular employees equally. FEHA harassment provisions under § 12940(j) apply to all employers regardless of size.

The narrow but powerful scope. Medical condition under FEHA is narrower than disability. The statute covers only two categories: cancer-related health impairments and genetic characteristics. However, within those categories, FEHA protection is stronger than parallel disability protection because no limitation of a major life activity is required.

Covered adverse actions. Medical condition discrimination claims arise across all employment decisions: refusal to hire, refusal to promote, termination, demotion, disparate compensation, shift assignments, performance evaluations, disciplinary actions, denial of benefits, and constructive discharge. Cancer survivors face documented patterns of adverse action years after remission — patterns that § 12926(i) directly addresses.

Relationship with other FEHA protections. Medical condition overlaps with but is distinct from disability, sex (including pregnancy), and reproductive health decisionmaking. Experienced plaintiffs' counsel typically plead all applicable theories together. A cancer patient who is also pregnancy-discriminated against may plead medical condition, disability, sex, and pregnancy — four overlapping theories on the same facts.

The § 12926(i) Definition — Cancer and Genetic Characteristics

Government Code § 12926(i) defines "medical condition" with specific statutory scope:

Paragraph (1) — Cancer. Any health impairment related to or associated with a diagnosis of cancer, or a record or history of cancer. The "record or history" language is particularly important — it protects cancer survivors long after remission or cure. An employee who had cancer decades ago and has been fully recovered remains protected under FEHA medical condition discrimination.

Paragraph (2) — Genetic characteristics. Any scientifically or medically identifiable gene or chromosome, or combination or alteration of genes or chromosomes, or any inherited characteristic that is known to cause a disease or disorder, or that may under certain environmental conditions increase the risk of disease. Genetic characteristics are protected even when the disease has not manifested and may never manifest.

No major life activity limitation required. The defining feature distinguishing medical condition from disability under FEHA is that medical condition requires no proof that the condition limits a major life activity. An employee can prevail on medical condition discrimination without establishing any functional impairment — the diagnosis, history, or genetic characteristic alone triggers protection.

Association coverage. Like other FEHA protected categories, medical condition discrimination extends to association. An employee discriminated against because of association with a cancer patient — a spouse, parent, child, or close relation with cancer — has a FEHA medical condition discrimination claim based on association.

How Medical Condition Differs from Disability Discrimination

California distinguishes medical condition from disability in important ways, and these distinctions drive case strategy. Both theories can be pled together when facts support both.

Threshold requirement. Disability under FEHA requires a condition that limits a major life activity. Medical condition under § 12926(i) requires no limitation of any major life activity. A cancer survivor who experiences no current physical limitation is protected by medical condition; whether the same survivor is protected by disability depends on fact-specific analysis of limitation.

Scope of conditions. Disability covers the full range of physical and mental conditions that limit major life activities — back injuries, mental health conditions, chronic illness, mobility impairments, and more. Medical condition covers only cancer, cancer history, and genetic characteristics. For conditions outside these two categories that do limit major life activities, disability is the applicable framework.

Reasonable accommodation. Disability under FEHA triggers the reasonable accommodation duty and interactive process under § 12940(m) and (n). The accommodation duty for medical condition is less explicitly developed in case law, though reasonable accommodation is generally available. In practice, cancer patients needing treatment-related accommodations typically plead both disability (treatment effects often limit major life activities) and medical condition (the diagnosis itself).

Strategic pleading. For most cancer-related employment cases, experienced California counsel plead both disability and medical condition. The disability claim provides the reasonable accommodation and interactive process framework. The medical condition claim provides the fallback protection that does not require proof of limitation. If the employer successfully challenges the limitation element of the disability claim, the medical condition claim survives independently.

Cancer and Cancer History Protection

Cancer-related employment discrimination is the most common category of medical condition claims under FEHA. Cancer survivors face patterns of documented adverse action that § 12926(i) directly addresses.

Active treatment protection. Employees undergoing chemotherapy, radiation, surgical treatment, immunotherapy, or other cancer treatment are protected. Treatment effects — fatigue, immune system suppression, cognitive effects ("chemo brain"), hair loss, physical changes — cannot be the basis of adverse employment action. Employees needing treatment-related time off, reduced schedules, remote work, or other accommodations are generally entitled to such accommodations under the overlapping disability framework and are protected from adverse action based on treatment requirements under medical condition.

Remission and recovery protection. Cancer survivors in remission, fully recovered, or cancer-free for years remain protected under § 12926(i). The "record or history of cancer" language expressly extends protection beyond active treatment. Employers cannot base employment decisions on the possibility of recurrence, on the employee's insurance cost implications, or on generalized concerns about the employee's longevity or commitment.

Common fact patterns. Employees terminated during or shortly after cancer diagnosis. Employees passed over for promotion because of cancer history. Employees denied positions involving significant training investment because the employer fears recurrence. Employees subject to excessive medical inquiries after disclosing cancer history. Employees whose benefits are reduced because of cancer-related health plan costs.

Pre-existing condition and insurance concerns. California employers cannot take adverse action based on concerns about health insurance costs, premium impact, or other insurance-related implications of an employee's cancer diagnosis or history. Such cost-based decisions are direct medical condition discrimination.

Return to work after treatment. Cancer survivors returning to work after treatment frequently face adverse treatment framed as "performance concerns," "restructuring," or "new business requirements." Temporal proximity between cancer treatment completion and adverse action creates strong circumstantial evidence of discriminatory motive. See our substantial motivating factor guide for the California causation framework.

Genetic Information and the GINA Federal Overlay

Genetic characteristics under § 12926(i)(2) and the federal Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) of 2008 together provide robust protection for employees with known genetic predispositions to disease.

California scope. FEHA protects any scientifically or medically identifiable gene, chromosome, or inherited characteristic known to cause disease or to increase disease risk under certain environmental conditions. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations (breast and ovarian cancer risk), Huntington's disease, sickle cell trait, cystic fibrosis carrier status, and other identified genetic characteristics are covered.

GINA federal overlay. GINA applies to employers with fifteen or more employees and prohibits discrimination based on genetic information. Genetic information under GINA includes genetic tests of the individual or family members, family medical history, and participation in genetic services. California FEHA coverage extends to smaller employers (five or more), giving California employees broader statutory coverage than GINA alone.

Dual-filing strategy. California employees facing genetic discrimination typically file both state and federal claims. FEHA provides uncapped damages and mandatory attorney's fees; GINA provides federal enforcement resources and administrative support through the EEOC. The overlapping frameworks reinforce each other.

Family medical history protection. Family medical history — information about diseases or conditions in the employee's parents, siblings, children, grandparents, or other relatives — is expressly protected under GINA. California FEHA covers family medical history indirectly through the genetic characteristics protection when the family history suggests a genetic predisposition.

Employer inquiries into family history. Employer inquiries into family medical history are generally prohibited under GINA and under California FEHA § 12940(e). Inquiries into whether an applicant's relatives have had cancer, heart disease, or other genetic conditions violate both state and federal law.

Predictive testing and screening. Employers cannot require, request, or purchase genetic tests of employees or applicants. Employer-mandated genetic testing as a condition of employment, promotion, or continued employment violates GINA and FEHA. Voluntary genetic testing as part of a wellness program is subject to specific GINA rules that require strict confidentiality and limited access to information.

Reproductive Health Decisionmaking Under SB 523

Although reproductive health decision-making is a separate FEHA-protected category rather than a form of medical condition, the two frequently overlap. SB 523 added reproductive health decision-making to FEHA's protected categories effective January 1, 2023, under § 12940(a).

Scope. Reproductive health decision-making covers employment decisions based on an employee's decisions related to contraception, pregnancy, pregnancy termination, fertility treatment, reproductive healthcare, and related reproductive choices.

Overlap with medical condition. When a reproductive healthcare decision involves cancer history — for example, a BRCA-positive employee's decision to undergo prophylactic surgery, or a cancer patient's decision about fertility preservation — both medical condition (cancer diagnosis or history, or genetic characteristic) and reproductive health decision-making apply. Plead both theories.

Pre-employment inquiry prohibition. Under § 12940(e), employers may not make pre-employment inquiries into reproductive healthcare decisions. Questions about contraception use, pregnancy plans, or reproductive healthcare during hiring violate the statute. For the full reproductive health framework, see our California sex and gender discrimination guide.

Employer Medical Inquiries and § 12940(e)

Government Code § 12940(e) strictly limits employer medical inquiries and examinations. The limitations depend on the employment stage.

Before conditional offer. Before a conditional offer of employment, an employer generally cannot require medical or psychological examinations, inquire whether an applicant has a medical condition, physical disability, or mental disability, or inquire regarding the nature or severity of a medical condition. An employer may inquire into the applicant's ability to perform job-related functions and may respond to applicant requests for reasonable accommodation.

After conditional offer. After a conditional offer, the employer may conduct medical examinations and inquiries, provided the examinations are required of all entering employees in the same job category. Targeted medical examinations of specific applicants — or examinations designed to screen out applicants with medical conditions — violate the statute.

During employment. Medical inquiries during employment must be job-related and consistent with business necessity. Generalized health inquiries, family medical history questions, and inquiries not tied to a specific accommodation request or fitness-for-duty concern violate the statute.

Medical examination limits. Even permissible medical examinations must be limited in scope to the specific job-related concern. Comprehensive physical examinations or genetic screenings not tied to specific job requirements violate both FEHA and GINA.

Violations as independent cause of action. Improper medical inquiries are independently actionable under FEHA even without adverse action based on the answers. Employees who were subjected to improper inquiries during hiring or employment can pursue FEHA claims for the inquiry violations themselves, separate from any underlying discrimination based on the information obtained.

Medical Information Confidentiality Obligations

California Civil Code § 56.20 and the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA) establish comprehensive medical information confidentiality obligations that supplement FEHA protections.

Separate and confidential files. Medical information obtained from employees — including medical examination results, accommodation-related medical documentation, medical leave documentation, and workers' compensation medical records — must be kept in separate, confidential files apart from the general personnel file. Access must be restricted to individuals with a legitimate need to know.

Supervisor information limitation. Supervisors generally may be informed that an employee has work restrictions or requires accommodation but cannot be provided with the specific medical diagnosis unless necessary for the accommodation. Broad disclosure of diagnosis to supervisors, coworkers, or management violates CMIA and supports independent claims.

Unauthorized disclosure remedies. Unauthorized disclosure of employee medical information creates liability under CMIA separate from FEHA discrimination. Remedies include actual damages, statutory damages of $1,000 per disclosure, attorney's fees, and, in some cases, punitive damages.

Post-termination obligations. Employer confidentiality obligations continue after termination. Disclosure of former employee medical information to prospective employers, in references, or in litigation outside lawful process violates CMIA.

HIPAA interaction. The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) generally does not apply to employer-held medical information, but does apply to group health plans and healthcare providers. California's CMIA fills the gap by covering employer-held medical information directly.

Common Forms of Medical Condition Discrimination

California medical condition discrimination practice involves recurring fact patterns that specialized counsel recognizes and develops systematically:

Post-diagnosis termination. Employees were terminated, demoted, or forced out shortly after disclosing a cancer diagnosis. Temporal proximity provides strong circumstantial evidence of a medical-condition-based motive.

Treatment-period adverse action. Employees subjected to adverse treatment during cancer treatment — often framed as "performance concerns" despite previous satisfactory performance. Documented changes in evaluation or discipline patterns during treatment periods are powerful evidence.

Post-remission discrimination. Cancer survivors are denied promotion, denied advancement opportunities, or terminated years after remission based on their cancer history. Often framed as unrelated "business decisions" but with temporal patterns suggesting cancer-history-based motive.

Insurance cost-driven decisions. Employees are terminated or forced to reduce hours when the employer becomes aware of a cancer diagnosis or projected treatment costs. Cost-based medical condition decisions are direct FEHA violations.

Family medical history inquiry. Employers asking applicants or employees about family medical history — parents' health conditions, siblings' cancer history, family genetic conditions. Violations of both GINA and FEHA § 12940(e).

Required genetic testing. Employers require genetic testing as a condition of employment or promotion. Per se, GINA violations with parallel FEHA claims.

BRCA and predictive genetic discrimination. Employees with known BRCA mutations or other cancer-predisposing genetic characteristics facing adverse employment action based on disease risk rather than current ability to perform the job. Expressly covered by § 12926(i)(2).

Cognitive concerns after treatment. Cancer patients and survivors facing adverse action based on "chemo brain" concerns or generalized fears about cognitive capacity. Often unsupported by specific performance issues and directly tied to medical condition.

Reassignment to undesirable roles. Cancer survivors returning from treatment are reassigned to less desirable territories, smaller accounts, or non-advancement-track roles. A disguised demotion that supports FEHA claims when temporally tied to treatment completion.

Supervisor disclosure violations. Supervisors informed of specific cancer diagnosis, genetic information, or other confidential medical information without job-related necessity. Independent CMIA and FEHA violations.

Hostile work environment. Mockery of cancer, jokes about cancer patients, derogatory comments about treatment effects (hair loss, weight changes, cognitive effects), or workplace culture hostile to employees with cancer history. Actionable harassment under § 12940(j).

Hostile Work Environment Based on Medical Condition

Government Code § 12940(j) prohibits harassment based on medical condition that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter employment conditions. Medical condition-based harassment claims are common and frequently produce high settlement values because of the emotional component tied to health and mortality.

Common forms. Mockery of cancer treatment effects, unwelcome comments about hair loss or physical changes, anti-cancer jokes, references to cancer as "contagious" or dangerous, exclusion from workplace activities based on cancer status, pressure to conceal cancer diagnosis from colleagues, and spreading of medical information.

Severity standard. Medical condition harassment must be either severe (a single incident of extreme severity can suffice) or pervasive (repeated conduct over time). Jokes about cancer directed at an employee who has cancer, or persistent comments about treatment effects, typically satisfy the severity or pervasiveness requirement.

Employer liability. California employers bear strict liability for medical condition harassment by supervisors and negligence-based liability for coworker harassment where the employer knew or should have known. The § 12940(k) affirmative duty to prevent discrimination and harassment creates additional liability for failure to maintain policies, train, or investigate. See our California workplace harassment guide.

How to Prove a Medical Condition Discrimination Claim

California medical condition discrimination claims proceed under the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework modified by California's substantial motivating factor causation standard under Harris v. City of Santa Monica (2013) 56 Cal-4th 203.

Prima facie case. The employee establishes membership in a protected category (cancer diagnosis, cancer history, or genetic characteristic), qualification for the position, an adverse employment action, and circumstances suggesting a causal connection. Direct evidence — statements referencing cancer, treatment, or genetic information in decision-making contexts — satisfies this step. Circumstantial evidence — timing relative to diagnosis disclosure, comparator treatment, post-complaint performance documentation — also suffices.

Employer's legitimate reason. The employer must articulate a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the adverse action — typically a performance concern, business judgment, or operational decision.

Pretext. The employee must show that the stated reason is pretextual and that the medical condition was a substantial motivating factor. Pretext evidence in medical condition cases frequently includes: performance documentation that first appears after diagnosis disclosure; absence of prior concerns before diagnosis; shifting explanations for adverse action; and comparator evidence showing that employees without medical conditions are treated differently.

Substantial motivating factor. Under Harris, the employee must prove medical condition was a substantial motivating factor — not the only reason, but a real and meaningful factor — in the adverse action. See our McDonnell Douglas guide and substantial motivating factor guide for the full causation frameworks.

No limitation proof required. The medical condition framework does not require proof that the condition limits a major life activity. This eliminates a common evidentiary burden imposed by disability discrimination. Cancer survivors who are fully recovered can prevail on medical condition claims without establishing any current functional impairment.

Associational claims. When the discrimination is based on association with a cancer patient rather than the employee's own diagnosis, the prima facie case establishes the associational relationship and adverse action tied to that relationship. Evidence frequently includes employer statements about the associated person's condition and the timing of disclosures of the association.

Damages Available Under FEHA

California FEHA medical condition discrimination cases provide the same plaintiff-favorable damages structure as other FEHA claims:

Damages Category	Availability	Cap
Back pay (lost wages through trial)	✅	None
Front pay (future lost earnings)	✅	None
Lost benefits (health insurance, retirement)	✅	None
Emotional distress damages	✅	None under FEHA
Punitive damages under Civil Code § 3294	✅ Where malice, oppression, or fraud is proven	Constitutional due process
Attorney's fees under Gov Code § 12965(c)	✅ Mandatory to prevailing plaintiff	N/A
Statutory damages under CMIA	✅ $1,000 per unauthorized disclosure	Per-violation
Injunctive relief	✅	N/A
Federal GINA damages	✅ (15+ employee threshold)	Capped with Title VII

The mandatory attorney's fees provision under FEHA § 12965(c) plus the availability of CMIA statutory damages for unauthorized medical information disclosure create favorable case economics. Medical condition cases frequently involve both FEHA discrimination claims and CMIA confidentiality claims, with damages accumulating under both theories.

For the complete FEHA damages framework, see our FEHA damages guide.

Statute of Limitations

California medical condition discrimination claims are subject to multiple filing deadlines depending on the theory:

Claim Type	Administrative Deadline	Civil Suit Deadline
FEHA medical condition discrimination	3 years to CRD	1 year after right-to-sue
Federal GINA discrimination	180 days to EEOC (or 300 days in California)	90 days after right-to-sue
CMIA unauthorized disclosure	2 years from discovery	N/A (civil suit)
FEHA medical condition harassment (continuing violation)	3 years from last act	1 year after right-to-sue
Retaliation for medical condition complaint	3 years to CRD	1 year after right-to-sue

Continuing violation doctrine. For ongoing harassment or pattern discrimination, the three-year FEHA period runs from the last act in a continuous course of conduct rather than from the first act.

Discovery rule. CMIA confidentiality claims run from the date the employee discovers the unauthorized disclosure. Because disclosure often occurs without the employee's knowledge, the discovery rule can significantly extend the effective filing window.

What to Do If You Suspect Medical Condition Discrimination

Document the diagnosis timeline. Keep records of when you disclosed your cancer diagnosis, genetic test results, family medical history, or other medical information to the employer. Preserve emails, written communications, and dated notes.

Document adverse action timing. Create a timeline showing the relationship between medical disclosure and adverse employment actions. Temporal proximity is central evidence in medical condition cases.

Preserve performance history. Performance reviews, commendations, sales records, and other objective performance evidence from before medical disclosure are critical. The contrast between pre-disclosure and post-disclosure performance documentation is often dispositive.

Request your personnel file. Under Labor Code § 1198.5, California employees have the right to inspect their personnel file. The employer must provide access within thirty days of request. Personnel files frequently reveal timing of performance documentation relative to medical events.

Request your medical file separately. Medical files must be kept separate from personnel files under CMIA. Employees generally have the right to access their own medical file. Review for any documentation that may support or defeat your claims.

Document any unauthorized disclosure. If you believe your medical information was shared with people who should not have had access — supervisors without a need to know, coworkers, prospective employers — document when and how you learned of the disclosure. CMIA claims are independently actionable.

Preserve comparative evidence. If employees without medical conditions are being treated differently for comparable conduct, document the comparison. Comparator evidence is central to medical condition cases.

Do not discuss settlement with the employer without counsel. Employers often pressure employees who have disclosed cancer or genetic information to accept early severance agreements. These agreements waive FEHA and CMIA claims worth many multiples of the severance amount. Consult counsel before signing anything.

Consult with specialized employment counsel promptly. Medical condition discrimination cases involve complex overlapping theories — FEHA medical condition, FEHA disability (for conditions with limitation), CMIA confidentiality, federal GINA, and common law privacy torts. Specialized counsel can evaluate which theories are strongest.

Consider the CRD process. Employees can file FEHA complaints with the California Civil Rights Department or file a complaint and immediately request a right-to-sue notice for civil court filing.

Frequently Asked Questions

What qualifies as a medical condition under California FEHA? Government Code § 12926(i) defines medical condition in two categories: (1) any health impairment related to or associated with a diagnosis of cancer or a record or history of cancer, and (2) genetic characteristics — any scientifically or medically identifiable gene, chromosome, or inherited characteristic known to cause disease or to increase disease risk. The "record or history of cancer" language protects cancer survivors long after remission. Genetic characteristics are protected even when the disease has not manifested. Other chronic illnesses and conditions that do not fall within these two categories are covered under FEHA disability protection rather than medical condition protection.

Does a cancer survivor have to prove current disability to bring a FEHA claim? No. This is the distinguishing feature of medical condition discrimination under § 12926(i). Unlike FEHA disability claims, which require proof that the condition limits a major life activity, medical condition claims require no such threshold. A cancer survivor who is fully recovered and unaffected by current limitations is still protected against employment discrimination based on the cancer diagnosis, treatment history, or cancer record.

Can my employer ask about my family medical history? Generally no. Under both the federal Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) and California FEHA § 12940(e), employers cannot ask applicants or employees about family medical history. Family medical history is considered genetic information under GINA and triggers the genetic characteristics protection under FEHA § 12926(i)(2). Questions about whether parents, siblings, or children have had cancer, heart disease, diabetes, or other conditions violate both state and federal law.

What is the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) and how does it relate to California law? GINA is a federal law prohibiting employment discrimination based on genetic information. It applies to employers with fifteen or more employees and covers genetic tests, family medical history, and participation in genetic services. California FEHA provides parallel protection under § 12926(i)(2) with a five-employee threshold — meaning California employees at smaller employers are covered by FEHA even when GINA does not apply. California employees facing genetic discrimination typically file claims under both statutes.

Can my employer require genetic testing as a condition of employment? No. Both GINA and California FEHA prohibit employer-required genetic testing. Employers cannot require, request, or purchase genetic tests of employees or applicants. Voluntary genetic testing as part of a wellness program is subject to strict GINA rules requiring confidentiality and limited information access. Any genetic test result obtained by an employer, whether voluntarily or otherwise, must be kept confidential and cannot be used in employment decisions.

Can I sue my employer for disclosing my medical information? Yes. California Civil Code § 56.20 and the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA) require employers to keep employee medical information in separate confidential files accessible only to persons with a legitimate need to know. Unauthorized disclosure of employee medical information — to supervisors without a need to know, to coworkers, to prospective employers, or in other unauthorized contexts — creates independent liability. CMIA remedies include actual damages, statutory damages of $1,000 per unauthorized disclosure, attorney's fees, and potentially punitive damages. CMIA claims can be pursued alongside FEHA discrimination claims.

How long do I have to file a medical condition discrimination claim in California? Three years to file a complaint with the California Civil Rights Department from the date of the last discriminatory act. After the CRD issues a right-to-sue notice, one additional year to file a civil lawsuit. Federal GINA claims have a 180-day administrative deadline (extended to 300 days in California because of FEHA dual-filing). CMIA confidentiality claims have their own two-year statute of limitations from the date of discovery of the unauthorized disclosure. When multiple theories apply, the shortest applicable deadline controls the most urgent decision.

DISCLOSURE 

This page is published and maintained by 1000Attorneys.com, a California State Bar Certified Lawyer Referral and Information Service, LRIS Certificate No. 0128, accredited by the American Bar Association and established in 2005. The information on this page is for general educational purposes only and is not legal advice. 1000Attorneys.com is not a law firm and does not provide legal representation. For legal advice about your specific situation, consult a qualified California attorney licensed to practice in the jurisdiction where your claim arises.