15 Cited authorities

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
411 U.S. 792 (1973) Cited 53,213 times 96 Legal Analyses
Holding in employment discrimination case that statistical evidence of employer's general policy and practice may be relevant circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent behind individual employment decision
Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc.
24 Cal.4th 317 (Cal. 2000) Cited 3,310 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that an implied covenant "cannot be endowed with an existence independent of its contractual underpinnings. It cannot impose substantive duties or limits on the contracting parties beyond those incorporated in the specific terms of their agreement."
Serri v. Santa Clara University
226 Cal.App.4th 830 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014) Cited 342 times 3 Legal Analyses
Affirming summary adjudication of harassment claims due to lack of "hostile or derogatory statements"
Taylor v. Principal Financial Group, Inc.
93 F.3d 155 (5th Cir. 1996) Cited 549 times
Holding that "the employee's initial request for an accommodation . . . triggers the employer's obligation to participate in the interactive process of determining one"
King v. United Parcel Services, Inc.
152 Cal.App.4th 426 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) Cited 383 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding employer had no duty to accommodate employee who returned to work with a doctor's note releasing him back to "regular duties and hours" and who admitted he was able to "get the job done"
Hersant v. Department of Social Services
57 Cal.App.4th 997 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997) Cited 492 times
Holding that "to avoid summary judgment, an employee claiming discrimination must offer substantial evidence that the employer's stated nondiscriminatory reason for the adverse action was untrue or pretextual, or evidence the employer acted with a discriminatory animus, or a combination of the two, such that a reasonable trier of fact could conclude the employer engaged in intentional discrimination.
Arteaga v. Brink's, Inc.
163 Cal.App.4th 327 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) Cited 335 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that elements of a common law disability discrimination claim are the same as those of a FEHA claim
Nealy v. City of Santa Monica
234 Cal.App.4th 359 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015) Cited 197 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the employee should be able to identify specific, available reasonable accommodations through the litigation process, and particularly by the time the parties have conducted discovery" (citing Scotch, 93 Cal. Rptr. 3d at 365)
Brundage v. Hahn
57 Cal.App.4th 228 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997) Cited 235 times
Holding that summary judgment was appropriate where the employer's staff did not know of a plaintiff's protected characteristic
Day v. Sears Holdings Corp.
930 F. Supp. 2d 1146 (C.D. Cal. 2013) Cited 88 times
Finding employee and her supervisor not comparable
Section 12940 - Unlawful employment practices
Cal. Gov. Code § 12940 Cited 1,033 times
Prohibiting discrimination because of "sex, ... sexual orientation," etc.

Motion for Summary Judgment

15 Cited authorities

Holding in employment discrimination case that statistical evidence of employer's general policy and practice may be relevant circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent behind individual employment decision

Holding that an implied covenant "cannot be endowed with an existence independent of its contractual underpinnings. It cannot impose substantive duties or limits on the contracting parties beyond those incorporated in the specific terms of their agreement."

Affirming summary adjudication of harassment claims due to lack of "hostile or derogatory statements"

Holding that "the employee's initial request for an accommodation . . . triggers the employer's obligation to participate in the interactive process of determining one"

Holding employer had no duty to accommodate employee who returned to work with a doctor's note releasing him back to "regular duties and hours" and who admitted he was able to "get the job done"

Holding that elements of a common law disability discrimination claim are the same as those of a FEHA claim

Holding that "the employee should be able to identify specific, available reasonable accommodations through the litigation process, and particularly by the time the parties have conducted discovery" (citing Scotch, 93 Cal. Rptr. 3d at 365)

Holding that summary judgment was appropriate where the employer's staff did not know of a plaintiff's protected characteristic

Finding employee and her supervisor not comparable

Prohibiting discrimination because of "sex, ... sexual orientation," etc.