Rancho Cucamonga Employment Lawsuit Alleges Age Disability Discrimination Retaliation and Wrongful Termination

Huprich Law Firm represents a Rancho Cucamonga construction professional alleging discrimination, retaliation, accommodation failures and wrongful termination.

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA, UNITED STATES, September 15, 2026 /EINPresswire.com/ — Huprich Law Firm, PC, announced the filing of an employment lawsuit in San Bernardino County Superior Court on behalf of a 58-year-old construction industry professional who alleges that his employer subjected him to discrimination, retaliation, failures to accommodate and wrongful termination following a serious medical crisis involving his wife.

The lawsuit, Case No. CIVRS2606213, was filed on July 2, 2026, in the Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, Rancho Cucamonga Courthouse. Attorney Joseph J. Huprich of Huprich Law Firm represents the plaintiff.

The Complaint names McGuire Builders, Inc. and Does 1 through 10 as defendants and asserts seven causes of action: discrimination in violation of California Government Code section 12940(a); failure to prevent discrimination and harassment under section 12940(k); retaliation for engaging in protected activity under section 12940(h); failure to engage in the interactive process under section 12940(n); failure to provide reasonable accommodation under section 12940(m); wrongful termination in violation of public policy; and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

According to the Complaint, the plaintiff lived and worked in Rancho Cucamonga, California, and had more than 35 years of experience in construction project management. McGuire Builders is described in the lawsuit as a national hotel remodeling contractor with projects throughout the United States.

The Complaint alleges that McGuire Builders hired the plaintiff in August 2024 as a Senior Project Manager/Senior Superintendent at a base annual compensation of $150,000, together with potential performance bonuses and other employment benefits. Following his hiring, the company assigned him to a construction project in San Antonio, Texas.

The lawsuit alleges that the plaintiff worked on the Texas project without performance issues or criticism until March 2025, when his wife was unexpectedly hospitalized in Texas because of a serious medical condition.

According to the Complaint, on or about March 14, 2025, Mike Tande, identified in the lawsuit as a Co-President of McGuire Builders, contacted the plaintiff and informed him that he was being immediately removed from the Texas project. The plaintiff was allegedly instructed to return to California for a review meeting and possible reassignment to a golf club project in Los Angeles.

The Complaint states that the plaintiff explained that his wife’s medical condition prevented her from traveling and that he therefore needed to remain in Texas while she received treatment. According to the lawsuit, Tande responded by asking whether it would be better for the plaintiff’s wife to be in California for her healthcare.

The plaintiff alleges that he did not request a leave of absence and did not state that he was unable or unwilling to continue performing his job duties. Nevertheless, the Complaint alleges that the company subsequently removed him from the Texas project, instructed project personnel not to communicate with him, discontinued his salary and employment benefits, and pressured him to return to California or provide a definite return date.

The lawsuit further alleges that the company later characterized the plaintiff’s employment status as an involuntary unpaid leave pending possible reassignment. The Complaint contends that this explanation was inconsistent with the company’s contemporaneous conduct, including the alleged cessation of compensation and benefits and treatment of the plaintiff as though his employment had effectively ended.

According to the Complaint, the plaintiff’s wife remained hospitalized in Texas during the final weeks of his employment. The lawsuit alleges that McGuire Builders repeatedly demanded that the plaintiff return to California or commit to a return date. It further alleges that the company terminated his health insurance, stopped paying for the hotel where the plaintiff and his wife were staying, failed to pay approximately 30 days of lodging expenses, and demanded the immediate return of a company vehicle.

The Complaint alleges that these actions caused substantial financial hardship while the plaintiff’s wife was receiving medical treatment and formed part of a broader course of discriminatory, retaliatory and otherwise unlawful conduct.

The lawsuit asserts that the plaintiff’s age, his association with a person allegedly affected by a disability or serious medical condition, and his protected activities were substantial motivating reasons for adverse employment actions taken against him. It further alleges that the defendants failed to engage in a timely, good-faith interactive process concerning reasonable accommodation and failed to provide reasonable accommodation.

The plaintiff also alleges that his termination violated fundamental public policies reflected in California law, including protections against employment discrimination and retaliation. The Complaint additionally asserts a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress, alleging that the defendants’ conduct caused severe emotional distress.

The plaintiff previously obtained a right-to-sue notice from the California Civil Rights Department, according to the Complaint, and alleges that all applicable administrative remedies were timely exhausted.

The lawsuit seeks recovery for alleged financial losses, including lost salary and employment benefits, compensatory and general damages, emotional distress damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, punitive damages, prejudgment interest, restitutionary damages and injunctive relief. The Complaint seeks at least $1 million in actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, at least $1 million in compensatory and general damages, and at least $500,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs, in each case according to proof. The plaintiff has also demanded a jury trial.

The allegations contained in the Complaint are claims by the plaintiff and have not been adjudicated. The defendants are entitled to present their defenses and contest the allegations through the litigation process.

Huprich Law Firm represents employees in California employment disputes involving discrimination, retaliation, wrongful termination, reasonable accommodation, harassment and other workplace rights.

Joseph Huprich
Huprich Law Firm, P.C.
+1 909-766-2226
email us here

Stop Age Discrimination: Know Your Rights in California!

Media gallery