§Why CasetextPricing

Mark J. Concialdi v. Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. et al

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings

11 Cited authorities

  1. Fleming v. Pickard

    581 F.3d 922 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 772 times
    Holding that judgment on the pleadings is properly granted “when there is no issue of material fact in dispute, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law”

  2. Johnson v. City of Loma Linda

    24 Cal.4th 61 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 588 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an administrative finding is binding on subsequent FEHA claims when an employee pursues administrative remedies, receives an adverse finding, and fails to have the finding set aside through a successful mandate action in superior court

  3. Romano v. Rockwell Internat., Inc.

    14 Cal.4th 479 (Cal. 1996)   Cited 579 times
    Holding that a FEHA action for discriminatory discharge does not commence until the actual discharge

  4. Martin v. Lockheed Missiles & Space Co.

    29 Cal.App.4th 1718 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994)   Cited 343 times
    Holding plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies where FEHA complaint did not include sex discrimination and retaliation claims

  5. Colmenares v. Braemar Country Club, Inc.

    29 Cal.4th 1019 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 182 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff need only show that a condition limits, as opposed to substantially limits (the federal requirement), his ability to participate in a major life activity

  6. Okoli v. Lockheed Technical Operations Co.

    36 Cal.App.4th 1607 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 187 times
    Holding employee's failure to exhaust administrative remedies barred retaliation claim where employee failed to amend DFEH charge to include employer's retaliatory actions, and new claims were "neither like nor reasonably related to DFEH claim"

  7. Hobson v. Raychem Corp.

    73 Cal.App.4th 614 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 71 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the inability to perform one particular job, or to work under a particular supervisor, does not constitute a qualified disability" under FEHA

  8. Williams v. City of Belvedere

    72 Cal.App.4th 84 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 36 times
    Rejecting argument that the DFEH's issuance of a right-to-sue letter renders an untimely charge timely

  9. Vizcaino v. Areas U.S., Inc.

    Case No. 2:15-cv-0417-JFW-PJW (C.D. Cal. Apr. 27, 2015)

    Case No. 2:15-cv-0417-JFW-PJW 04-27-2015 ALEJANDRO VIZCAINO, an individual, Plaintiff, v. AREAS USA, INC., a corporation, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants. Judge: Hon. John F. Walter CLOSED JUDGMENT Courtroom: 16 Judge: Hon. John F. Walter Action Filed: Jan. 13, 2015 Action Removed: Jan. 21, 2015 Trial Date: Not Set On April 17, 2015, the Court issued an Order at ECF Dkt. No. 30 granting in whole the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Alejandro Vizcaino's ("Plaintiff") First Amended Complaint filed

  10. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 344,948 times   920 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  11. Section 10005 - Obtaining a Right-to-Sue Notice from the Department

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2 § 10005   Cited 8 times
    Allowing complainants to waive investigation by DFEH in favor of obtaining an immediate right-to-sue notice