Hannon

Hannon v. Chater

Good Law
900 F. Supp. 1276·95 Daily Journal DAR 13644·1995 WL 545318·1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18470
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 12, 1995C 94-20351 EAICalifornia6,044 words

Opinion

Opinion

Infante, J.

ORDER AWARDING PLAINTIFF HAN-NON DECLARATORY AND INJUNC-TIVE RELIEF AND ATTORNEY’S FEES

I. Introduction and Background

Plaintiff T. Patrick Hannon, an attorney representing himself with associated co-coun sel, was previously granted partial summary judgment on his claim that, while applying to become an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) with the Social Security Administration (“SSA”), he was the victim of gender discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. Under the 1991 amendments to Title VII, it is unlawful for an employer to use gender as a motivating factor in a hiring decision, even though other factors may have also motivated the decision, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e~2(m), and in this case an SSA de-clarant admitted that in 1993 gender was a factor favoring a female candidate, Anita Shapiro, who was selected instead of Hannon and another male applicant to be an ALJ in Los Angeles (the so-called “position 12”).

Fashioning an appropriate remedy was an issue expressly left unaddressed in the Court’s ruling, but it was observed that the remedy “may be circumscribed depending on the Government’s ability to convince the trier-of-fact…

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.