Defense Wins in CalTech Engineer's Disability Discrimination Case

Thomas Weeks vs. California Institute of Technology, a California Corporation

Case Background

Thomas Weeks filed an employment discrimination lawsuit against the California Institute of Technology. The lawsuit included nine counts against the Defendant including wrongful termination, disability discrimination, retaliation, and negligent supervision. The lawsuit was filed in the California Superior Court, Los Angeles County. Judges Jill Feeney, Daniel M. Crowley, and Robert S. Draper presided over this case. [Case number: 20STCV38683]

Cause

Defendant California Institute of Technology's headquarters, spanning 177 acres and nicknamed “the Lab,” employs over 6,000 people. The Plaintiff’s office and the Voyager team operated out of Building 600, located two miles away. In 1983, Plaintiff Thomas Weeks joined Defendant as an engineer for NASA’s Voyager Project, which explored outer planets using unmanned spacecraft. His work contributed to charting Uranus and Neptune, igniting his passion for space exploration. After leaving in 1990 to pursue filmmaking, Defendant requested Weeks to return in 2000 to lead the Voyager mission, becoming a key expert as the team dwindled to three engineers. Between 2004 and 2006, the Plaintiff discovered software flaws threatening Voyager’s connection to Earth. He urged hiring the original developer to fix them, but leaders dismissed his recommendations. When his warnings proved correct, leadership ignored his concerns about inefficiencies and potential misuse of funds. Over time, workplace harassment worsened. Supervisors undermined his expertise, while colleagues falsely accused him of errors. Despite resolving a critical Voyager 1 issue, he was unfairly blamed for the problem. By 2016, personal attacks, including defamatory rumors, excluded him from outreach efforts. In 2017, threats from a coworker left him fearing for his safety. In 2018, after years of harassment, the Plaintiff took medical leave. HR mishandled his complaints, dismissing valid concerns as mere “banter” or “bullying.” Security escorted him from the premises during a meeting, despite his appropriate behavior. Attempts to escalate complaints to the Ethics department failed, as HR undermined his anonymity and dismissed his claims. Between 2019 and 2020, the Plaintiff’s accommodation requests were consistently denied. HR accused him of “doctor shopping” and pressured him to accept disability. The Defendant banned him from the workplace, revoked his security clearance, and effectively blacklisted him from the aerospace industry. Despite medical clearance, he remains excluded and unable to return.

Damages

Under this disability discrimination lawsuit, Plaintiff requested compensatory damages for lost wages, benefits, future earnings, emotional distress, and medical costs. Additionally, the Plaintiff sought punitive damages to punish the Defendants and prevent future misconduct. The Plaintiff also asked for restitution of any unjust gains, reimbursement for legal fees, and interest before and after the judgment. Lastly, the Plaintiff sought any other relief the court found appropriate.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

Plaintiff(s): Thomas Weeks
- Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Jane T. Aune

Defendant(s): California Institute of Technology
- Counsel for Defendant(s): Holly R. Lakes | Ryan M. Estes

Claims

First Cause of Action: Disability Discrimination Under Government Code section 12940, Defendants unlawfully discriminated against Plaintiff based on his disability, which was a protected category. Plaintiff exhausted administrative remedies and received a Right to Sue letter. Defendants’ actions caused Plaintiff to lose his job, wages, and benefits, and suffer emotional distress. Second Cause of Action: Failure to Provide Reasonable Accommodations Defendants failed to provide reasonable accommodations despite Plaintiff’s multiple requests. Plaintiff filed a complaint with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing and received a Right to Sue letter. Plaintiff suffered emotional distress and lost earnings due to Defendants' actions and sought punitive damages. Third Cause of Action: Failure to Engage in the Interactive Process Defendants failed to engage in a good faith interactive process regarding Plaintiff’s disability, causing emotional distress, lost earnings, and physical pain. Fourth Cause of Action: Retaliation Defendants retaliated against Plaintiff for requesting accommodations and taking medical leave. Fifth Cause of Action: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Defendants’ extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally caused Plaintiff severe emotional distress. Sixth Cause of Action: Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy Defendants wrongfully terminated Plaintiff in violation of public policy, causing loss of wages, benefits, and emotional harm. Seventh Cause of Action: Violation of Labor Code Defendants retaliated against Plaintiff for reporting misconduct, causing lost wages and emotional suffering. Eighth Cause of Action: Unfair Business Practices Defendants engaged in unfair business practices, including discrimination and retaliation. Plaintiff sought disgorgement and other legal remedies. Ninth Cause of Action: Negligent Supervision Defendants failed to supervise their employees, leading to discriminatory and retaliatory conduct that harmed Plaintiff.

Defense

Defendant, California Institute of Technology, denied all allegations in Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, arguing that Plaintiff failed to state a valid cause of action and was at fault for his own alleged damages. Defendant raised multiple defenses, including failure to exhaust administrative remedies, waiver, laches, and statute of limitations. It also argued that Plaintiff’s claims were barred by doctrines such as unclean hands, estoppel, and in pari delicto. Defendant further asserted that any alleged misconduct was either justified, privileged, or caused by Plaintiff’s own actions. Additionally, Defendant contended that Plaintiff’s claims were time-barred, lacked standing, and sought unjust enrichment. Finally, Defendant reserved the right to assert further defenses as discovery progresses.

Jury Verdict

On June 12, 2024, the jury unanimously returned a defense verdict on all eight counts presented before it (except for the Sixth Count of wrongful termination which was not tried by the jury). No damages were awarded to Thomas Weeks in this disability discrimination lawsuit. On June 24, 2024, Judge Jill T. Feeney entered a judgment favoring the Defendant on all nine counts.

Court Documents:

Available for purchase upon request

Jury Rejects Disability Discrimination Lawsuit Against Caltech by NASA Voyager Engineer