18 Cited authorities

  1. Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc.

    530 U.S. 133 (2000)   Cited 21,460 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, since the 58-year-old plaintiff was fired by his 60-year-old employer, there was an inference that "age discrimination was not the motive"
  2. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green

    411 U.S. 792 (1973)   Cited 53,059 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
  3. Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc.

    24 Cal.4th 317 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 3,298 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."
  4. 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"
  5. King v. United Parcel Services, Inc.

    152 Cal.App.4th 426 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 382 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"
  6. Trujillo v. North County Transit Dist.

    63 Cal.App.4th 280 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 482 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the statutory language of § 12940 does not "support recovery on . . . a private right of action where there has been a specific factual finding that [the alleged] discrimination or harassment actually occurred at the plaintiffs's workplace"
  7. Reynolds v. Bement

    36 Cal.4th 1075 (Cal. 2005)   Cited 273 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that statutes are construed in light of the common law unless the Legislature clearly and unequivocally indicates otherwise
  8. Avila v. Continental Airlines, Inc.

    165 Cal.App.4th 1237 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 250 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that calling in sick during an absence and providing hospital forms describing the illness upon return to work is sufficient notice
  9. Patten v. Grant Joint Union High School Dist.

    134 Cal.App.4th 1378 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 229 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding plaintiff engaged in protected activity when she reported activity she thought was illegal
  10. Flait v. North American Watch Corp.

    3 Cal.App.4th 467 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 322 times
    Holding that California state law claims of retaliatory discharge are evaluated under the framework used in federal law relating to discrimination and retaliation
  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 335,102 times   160 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
  12. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 23,013 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system
  13. Section 6310 - Discharge or discrimination against employee

    Cal. Lab. Code § 6310   Cited 281 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Granting right of reinstatement and reimbursement to "[a]ny employee who is discharged, threatened with discharge, demoted, suspended, or in any other manner discriminated against in the terms and conditions of employment by his or her employer because the employee has made a bona fide oral or written complaint to . . . his or her employer, or his or her representative, of unsafe working conditions, or work practices"
  14. Section 11023 - Harassment and Discrimination Prevention and Correction

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2 § 11023   Cited 12 times   4 Legal Analyses

    (a) Employers have an affirmative duty to take reasonable steps to prevent and promptly correct discriminatory and harassing conduct. (Gov. Code, § 12940(k).) (1) A determination as to whether an employer has complied with Government Code section 12940(k) includes an individualized assessment, depending upon numerous factors sometimes unique to the particular employer including, but not limited to, its workforce size, budget, and nature of its business, as well as upon the facts of a particular case