Shephard

Shephard v. Loyola Marymount University

Good Law
102 Cal. App. 4th 837·125 Cal. Rptr. 2d 829·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 4737·2002 Daily Journal DAR 11545·89 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1856
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 3, 2002B150210California3,393 words

Opinion

Opinion

Turner, J.

I. Introduction

Plaintiff, Kisha Shephard, appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of defendants, Loyola Marymount University (the school) and Julie Wilhoit, on a complaint for race discrimination and breach of oral contract. The lawsuit arose out of the school’s refusal to renew plaintiffs athletic scholarship and her removal from the women’s basketball team. Defendants’ summary judgment motion was brought and granted on grounds: plaintiffs cause of action for race discrimination in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.) was barred as a matter of law because she was a student athlete and not a school employee; Ms. Wilhoit was not liable for damages because there is no individual liability under the FEHA; plaintiffs contract claim was barred by the statute of frauds; and plaintiff failed to exhaust her administrative remedies. Plaintiff opposed the summary judgment motion on its merits but also requested a continuance because of ongoing discovery proceedings. In addition, plaintiff requested leave to amend her complaint to assert fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims. The trial court denied the…

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.