Bennett

Bennett v. Borden, Inc.

Bad Law
128 Cal. Rptr. 627·1976 Cal. App. LEXIS 1395·56 Cal. App. 3d 706·11 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 10,703·18 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1318
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 15, 1976Civ. 15046California840 words

Opinion

Opinion

Friedman, J.

Plaintiff filed this civil action for damages and injunctive relief against his former employers in August 1973, alleging that he had been relieved of his job as plant superintendent in April 1973 solely because of his age and that he had been replaced by a younger person. In October 1974 defendants’ motion for summary judgment was granted, on the ground that plaintiff had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies within one year from his April 1973 discharge. Plaintiff appeals from the summary judgment.

The Fair Employment Practice Act declares that the discharge of an employee between the ages of 40 and 64 solely on the ground of age is an unlawful employment practice. (Lab. Code, § 1420.1, enacted in 1972.) The act further provides that a person claiming to be aggrieved by an unlawful employment practice may within one year file a verified complaint with the Fair Employment Practice Commission, which shall then notify the employer, conduct an investigation, and, if warranted, file a written accusation against the employer and hold a hearing. (Lab. Code, §§ 1422-1425.) If the commission finds that the employer has engaged in an unlawful labor practice, it may issue…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.