A Los Angeles judge has refused to send a former Disneyland merchandise hostess's employment discrimination lawsuit to Orange County, ruling that keeping the case in downtown Los Angeles poses no greater burden on Disney's witnesses than shipping it south to Anaheim. Kristin Jacobson, who worked for Disney for 18 years before she says she was fired in April 2023, had filed her lawsuit in Los Angeles County in July 2023, and Disney had fought for months to move it.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Randolph M. Hammock denied Disney's motion to transfer the case, according to MyNewsLA.com. Hammock heard arguments on the venue-transfer motion, allowed Disney to file additional briefing on July 15, and then took the matter under submission on July 22 before issuing his ruling. In his written decision, the judge was blunt about why Disney's core argument fell flat: “In the end, trial is similarly inconvenient for defendants' employee witnesses, whether Los Angeles County or Orange County,” Hammock wrote.
Jacobson alleges Disney fired her at the Anaheim theme park because of health issues, including lupus, rheumatoid arthritis and hyperthyroidism, and her resulting need for time off. Her thyroid was surgically removed earlier in her life, according to the lawsuit. She says she remained willing and able to work despite her disabilities, sought appropriate accommodation including medical leave, and opposed conduct she reasonably believed was discriminatory, harassing or otherwise unlawful. Disney, for its part, maintains Jacobson was fired because of unjustified excessive absenteeism, per the same account.
Why Disney Wanted a Different Courtroom
Disney's attorneys argued that Orange County-based employee witnesses would be inconvenienced by having to travel to Los Angeles for trial, since Disney employee witnesses would travel between Orange County and Los Angeles County either way. Hammock was not convinced by that argument, effectively finding the travel burden was a wash regardless of which county hosted the trial.
The legal tug-of-war over venue is not unique to Jacobson's case. Under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act, employment discrimination plaintiffs are given broad latitude to choose venue, per Eanet, PC, which notes that FEHA suits may be filed in the county where the unlawful practice occurred, where relevant records are kept, or where the employee would have worked but for the violation. That flexibility exists in part because Disney maintains corporate headquarters and major business operations in Los Angeles County, even though its Anaheim theme park sits in Orange County.
A Contrasting Ruling in a Similar Case
Disney routinely moves to transfer employment cases tied to its Anaheim park to Orange County under Code of Civil Procedure Section 397(c), citing witness convenience, and it doesn't always lose that fight. In April 2025, a different Los Angeles Superior Court judge, Christopher K. Lui, granted Disney's venue transfer motion in a separate wrongful termination suit brought by former Fantasyland worker Jody Hunter-Deno, ruling that proper venue belonged in Orange County, as reported by the Los Angeles Times. That earlier ruling stands in direct contrast to Hammock's decision in Jacobson's case, underscoring how much discretion individual judges retain even when Disney raises nearly identical arguments.
Under Section 397(c), the moving defendant carries the burden of proving that travel to the original forum poses actual hardship on witnesses, according to GMSR Appellate Lawyers, which notes that a 2022 California Court of Appeal decision required trial courts to weigh physical travel burdens even as remote testimony options expanded after the pandemic. That burden appears to be exactly what tripped up Disney's motion this time, since Hammock found the travel calculus cut both ways.
Case Set for Trial Next Summer
Jacobson's lawsuit will now proceed in Los Angeles County, with trial scheduled for August 23, 2027. Under California Government Code Section 12965, employers must pay reasonable attorney's fees to prevailing plaintiffs in workplace discrimination cases, while employers can only recover their own fees if a lawsuit is shown to be frivolous or groundless — a fee-shifting dynamic that helps explain why venue fights like this one are so heavily contested before trial even begins.
The case also lands amid broader scrutiny of Disney's California employment practices. In December 2025, another Los Angeles Superior Court judge, Elihu Berle, granted final approval to a $43.25 million class action settlement resolving claims that Disney systematically underpaid female employees in California compared to male peers, according to HR Dive. Disney has also faced earlier disability-related disputes in the state, including a 2020 lawsuit from a 32-year employee who alleged harassment after taking medical leave for surgery, per Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP.
Jacobson's case is one of several employment disputes Hoodline has tracked moving through Los Angeles Superior Court in recent weeks, including a separate Disney discrimination suit also filed against the company. Judge Hammock, who has presided over general civil matters in Department 509 at the Stanley Mosk Courthouse since his election to the bench in 2010, has also recently ruled in other closely watched civil matters, including proceedings tied to the A$AP Rocky defamation case and a civil rights lawsuit involving former Sheriff candidate Alex Villanueva.
