Search anything: case name, case number, motion type, judge, or party

226-250 of 346 results

JOSHUA MCDONOUGH VS MRS GOOCHS NATURAL FOOD MARKETS INC ET A

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. Conclusion Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. Moving party to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Feb 14, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

LARA VS. MITSUBISHI RAYON CARBON FIBER AND COMPOSITES, INC.

“[I]n disability discrimination actions, the plaintiff has not shown the defendant has done anything wrong until the plaintiff can show he or she was able to do the job with or without reasonable accommodation.” Green v. State (2007) 42 Cal.4th 254, 265.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2017

LINDSEY VS. UPS GROUND FREIGHT INC

The trial court granted summary judgment on the ground that plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue that he requested an accommodation from Continental.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2017

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

LINDSEY VS. UPS GROUND FREIGHT INC

The trial court granted summary judgment on the ground that plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue that he requested an accommodation from Continental.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2017

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

LINDSEY VS. UPS GROUND FREIGHT INC

The trial court granted summary judgment on the ground that plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue that he requested an accommodation from Continental.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2017

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

MARTIN V. LOMPOC UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL.

to provide reasonable accommodation was a substantial factor is causing plaintiff’s harm.

  • Hearing

    Mar 12, 2019

ANTONIA HERNANDEZ VS SUSHI NOZAWA LLC ET AL

Courts “liberally construe the evidence in support of the party opposing summary judgment and resolve doubts concerning the evidence in favor of that party.” (Dore v.

  • Hearing

    Aug 03, 2017

FAVVAD ANWAR V. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION, ET AL.

Summary Judgment Standards: Summary judgment is appropriate where there is no triable issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. (CCP § 437c(c).)

  • Hearing

    May 21, 2018

LINDSEY VS. UPS GROUND FREIGHT INC

The trial court granted summary judgment on the ground that plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue that he requested an accommodation from Continental.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2017

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

KARIM NDIAYE VS AIR CANADA ET AL

Therefore, summary judgment is appropriate as to the fourth cause of action. Issue No. 5: Fifth Cause of Action “To prevail on a claim for failure to engage in the interactive process, the employee must identify a reasonable accommodation that would have been available at the time the interactive process occurred.” (Nealy v. City of Santa Monica (2015) 234 Cal.App.4th 359, 379.)

  • Hearing

    Dec 30, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

LIANNA REBOLLEDO VS HOMBRE NUEVO

The Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED as to the Second Cause of Action.

  • Hearing

    Jun 26, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

AIELLO VS. MARCOTTE DEVELOPMENT

HEARING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION FILED BY MARCOTTE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, et al. * TENTATIVE RULING: * Defendants Marcotte Development Company and Deer Creek Partnership’s (“Defendants”) motion for summary judgment is denied. Defendants’ motion for summary adjudication is denied in part and granted in part.

  • Hearing

    Apr 17, 2019

VIRIDIANA VIZCAINO VS WORLD SERVICE WEST/LA INFLIGHT SERVICE

“Under FEHA, ‘reasonable accommodation’ means ‘a modification or adjustment to the workplace that enables the employee to perform the essential functions of the job held or desired.’ (Nadaf–Rahrov v.

  • Hearing

    Jun 15, 2017

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

MONICA ZENO VS. AMGEN INCORPORATED, ET AL.

(“Defendants”) for Summary Judgment or, in the alternative, Summary Adjudication, to the First Amended Complaint of Plaintiff Monica Zeno (“Plaintiff”), is ruled on as follows: (1) For purposes of motions for summary judgment and summary adjudication, a defendant has met its burden of showing that a cause of action has no merit if the party has shown that one or more elements cannot be established, or there is a complete defense to the cause of action. (C.C.P. § 437c(p)(2).)

  • Hearing

    Feb 28, 2018

LILIAN GARCIA VS TIME WARNER CABLE ET AL

Based on the foregoing, TWC’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. Moving party is ordered to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Nov 19, 2018

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

JEFF PHILLIPS VS. CALIFORNIA LUTHERAN UNIVERSITY

While an employer is only responsible for providing a reasonable accommodation, the Court is not prepared at this stage of the proceedings to find that Ms. Schmid's assistance was a "reasonable" accommodation. There is also uncertainty as to what efforts CLU made to engage in the process to resolve Plaintiff's needs. Accordingly, the Court denies the MSA as to Issue 3, 4, 5.

  • Hearing

    Apr 08, 2016

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

IGNACIO AMEZQUITA VS WALGREEN CO ET AL

Defendants now move for summary judgment, or alternatively, summary adjudication as to each cause of action and Plaintiff’s claim for punitive damages.

  • Hearing

    Nov 18, 2016

SONIA HOLGUIN VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES

By alleging that her supervisor “stripped her of important job duties” and took other actions after she complained about the lack of reasonable accommodation, and that the same supervisor “contacted her new department and successfully sought to negatively influence Ms. Holguin’s performance reviews,” among other actions (3AC ¶ 29), Plaintiff has alleged causation sufficiently.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2019

MCSHERRY VS SHEA HOMES MARKETING COMPANY

The elements of a failure to provide reasonable accommodation claim (count 3) are: (1) the plaintiff "suffers from a disability covered by FEHA and that he or she is a qualified individual"; (2) the plaintiff "can perform the essential functions of the position"; and (3) the employer failed to make a reasonable accommodation for the known disability. Jensen v. Wells Fargo Bank, supra, 85 Cal.App.4th at 256. D.

  • Hearing

    Mar 02, 2017

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

DEBRA SAVALA VS WELLS FARGO BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION ET AL

In light of the court’s denial of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, the court is inclined to deny any request for a continuance.

  • Hearing

    Aug 08, 2018

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

MCSHERRY VS SHEA HOMES MARKETING COMPANY

The elements of a failure to provide reasonable accommodation claim (count 3) are: (1) the plaintiff "suffers from a disability covered by FEHA and that he or she is a qualified individual"; (2) the plaintiff "can perform the essential functions of the position"; and (3) the employer failed to make a reasonable accommodation for the known disability. Jensen v. Wells Fargo Bank, supra, 85 Cal.App.4th at 256. D.

  • Hearing

    Mar 02, 2017

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

KELLY VS. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

Defendants County of San Diego and Steve Martinez have brought a motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative summary adjudication. Plaintiffs have opposed the motion.

  • Hearing

    Jul 31, 2017

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

DAMOUDE VS. CHEVRON USA

HEARING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION FILED BY CHEVRON U.S.A. INC. * TENTATIVE RULING: * Defendant Chevron U.S.A, Inc.’s motion for summary judgment is denied. Defendant’s motion for summary adjudication is also denied. As to the first cause of action for a violation of the California Family Rights Act (“CFRA”), Gov’t Code Section 12945.2, Plaintiff has alleged both a failure to allow a CFRA leave and retaliation for taking a CFRA leave.

  • Hearing

    Jun 27, 2016

  • Judge Ed Weil
  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

KELLY VS. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

Defendants County of San Diego and Steve Martinez have brought a motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative summary adjudication. Plaintiffs have opposed the motion.

  • Hearing

    Jul 31, 2017

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

WANDA JIMENEZ VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES PROBATION DEPARTMENT

The second cause of action alleges that Plaintiff engaged in the protected activities of: (1) requesting reasonable accommodation; and (2) opposing and complaining about the unlawful harassment and discrimination by Defendant Harris. 2AC, ¶ 27.

  • Hearing

    Apr 17, 2017

  « first    1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.