(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this workplace/sex discrimination case and its proceedings.) It should also be pointed out that to the extent that the Retirement Board found Mr. Carter unfit and suitable for retirement in…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this workplace/sex discrimination case and its proceedings.) Nowhere does Dr. X. challenge the Retirement Board’s January of 2005 decision to retire plaintiff. There simply isn’t any testimony relating to the…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this workplace/sex discrimination case and its proceedings.) IT WAS NOT ERROR TO ALLOW EVIDENCE OF ACTS THAT OCCURRED PRIOR TO JUNE 10, 2004 A. Events from February of 2004 to…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this workplace/sex discrimination case and its proceedings.) B. The Application for Involuntary Disability Retirement was an Adverse Employment Action The defendant cynically claims that it had a duty to apply…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this workplace/sex discrimination case and its proceedings.) PLAINTIFF WAS SUBJECT TO AN ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTION A. The Fitness for Duty Evaluations The jury in this case determined that the defendant…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this workplace/sex discrimination case and its proceedings.) In Birschtein v. New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc. (2002) 92 Cal.App. 4th 994, 1004, the California Court of Appeals noted that the foundation…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this workplace/sex discrimination case and its proceedings.) Significantly, in Yanowitz the California Supreme Court addressed this tolling concept as it relates to the continuing violation doctrine: In Richards, we recognized…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this workplace/sex discrimination case and its proceedings.) THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS WAS TOLLED WHILE PLAINTIFF FOUGHT FOR HIS JOB A. Retaliation and Discrimination In Yanowitz, the California Supreme Court held…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this workplace/sex discrimination case and its proceedings.) Significantly-and fatally for the defendant’s statute of limitations argument-the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff on his claim for failure…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this workplace/sex discrimination case and its proceedings.) 1) Sufficiently Similar in Kind Plaintiff presented evidence that retaliatory and discriminatory acts that were extremely similar in kind occurred both before and…