 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Moreno v. County of San Joaquin2/4/2002
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
On August 21, 1995, Manuel Moreno was terminated from his employment with the County of San Joaquin (County). Moreno had been a Group Counselor I at the County's Juvenile Hall since February 1988. The County claims it terminated Moreno for repeated incidents of misconduct at work. Moreno claims his termination was retaliation for his complaints regarding racial and sexual discrimination at Juvenile Hall. The trial court granted the County's motion for summary judgment. We affirm.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The purpose of a summary judgment is to provide courts with a mechanism to cut through the parties' pleadings in order to determine whether, despite their allegations, trial is in fact necessary to resolve their dispute. (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 843 (hereafter Aguilar).) The trial court must grant a motion for summary judgment if all the papers submitted show there is no triable issue as to any material fact. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437(c), subd. (c); Aguilar, supra, 25 Cal.4th at p. 843.) The court determines whether a triable issue exists by reviewing the evidence and drawing reasonable inferences in favor of the party opposing the motion. (Gootee v. Lightner (1990) 224 Cal.App.3d 587, 591.)
In moving for summary judgment, a defendant meets his burden of showing a cause of action has no merit if he can prove one of the following: (1) one or more elements of the cause of action cannot be established or (2) there is a complete defense to the cause of action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437(c) subd. (o)(2); Aguilar, supra, 25 Cal.4th at p. 849.) Once this burden is met, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show a triable issue of one or more material facts exists. The plaintiff may not rely on mere allegations or denials in his pleadings to show a triable issue of material fact exists. Instead, the plaintiff must set forth the specific facts proving a triable issue as to the cause of action or a defense. (Ibid.)
We review the ruling de novo to determine whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether summary judgment is proper as a matter of law. (Hersant v. Department of Social Services (1997) 57 Cal.App.4th 997, 1001.) In doing so, we are not bound by the trial court's stated reasons. (Ibid.) We review the evidence in the light most favorable to the opposing party. (Aguilar, supra, 25 Cal.4th at p. 843; Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 171, 183.) Accordingly, our statement of the facts construes the evidence in the light most favorable to Moreno. While disputes are noted in footnotes, only the undisputed facts and the disputed facts construed in favor of Moreno are utilized in determining whether summary judgment was proper.
FACTS
Moreno was employed by the County as a Group Counselor I at Juvenile Hall from February 1988 through September 1995. He received a number of good job evaluations prior to August 1994.
Between November 1992 and mid-1994 Moreno claims Rosemary Fruend, a co-worker, subjected him to unwelcome and offensive sexual advances, such as grabbing and touching his genital area and placing her foot on Moreno's buttocks in front of others while making comments like, "you love it." Away from work, Moreno consoled Fruend when her husband died and helped her move out of her house. Moreno's supervisor, Laura Kitagawa, tes
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 California Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|