California disability-discrimination plaintiffs almost always plead FEHA — the state Fair Employment and Housing Act — rather than the federal Americans with Disabilities Act. The two statutes cover similar conduct, but the practical advantages of FEHA add up to a significant difference in case posture.
Coverage Threshold
The ADA applies to employers with 15 or more employees. FEHA applies to employers with 5 or more (Gov. Code § 12926(d)). That single difference brings small-employer cases into FEHA that the federal statute would never reach. For California plaintiff counsel, the threshold is the first reason FEHA is the default.
Disability Definition
The ADA defines disability as a physical or mental impairment that “substantially limits” a major life activity. FEHA defines disability as one that simply “limits” a major life activity, with no “substantial” modifier (Gov. Code § 12926(m)). The California Supreme Court has repeatedly construed FEHA’s definition more expansively than the federal counterpart.
For plaintiffs with conditions that fall in the gray area — common back injuries, mild anxiety disorders, ongoing recovery from surgery — FEHA reaches conduct the ADA might exclude.
Reasonable Accommodation and Interactive Process
FEHA codifies the interactive process as an independent obligation (Gov. Code § 12940(n)). Failure to engage in the process is itself a violation, separable from failure to accommodate. The ADA reads the interactive process as part of the accommodation analysis rather than an independent claim.
The practical impact: a California employer who never had to actually deny an accommodation can still be on the hook for failing to engage in the interactive conversation about whether one was possible.
Damages
FEHA has no statutory cap on compensatory or punitive damages. The ADA caps combined compensatory and punitive damages at $50,000–$300,000 depending on employer size (42 U.S.C. § 1981a(b)(3)). For a case with significant emotional-distress exposure or punitive potential, the cap difference is often dispositive.
Attorney’s Fees
Both statutes allow prevailing-plaintiff fee recovery. FEHA’s fee provision (Gov. Code § 12965(c)(6)) is read more generously by California courts and has supported large multipliers in fee awards.
When the ADA Goes In
Federal pleading appears when there is a federal-court advantage (specific judges, removal posture) or when the plaintiff also has a Rehabilitation Act claim against a federal contractor. Otherwise FEHA-only is the default in 2026 California practice.