Bond

Bond v. Pulsar Video Productions

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 1040·50 Cal. App. 4th 918·57 Cal. Rptr. 2d 917·96 Daily Journal DAR 13505·73 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 867
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 7, 1996C021443California2,177 words

Opinion

Opinion

Raye, J.

Plaintiff Michael L. Bond filed suit against his former employer defendant Pulsar Video Productions (Pulsar) alleging numerous causes of action, including racial discrimination. A jury found in favor of Pulsar on the discrimination claim, and Pulsar sought attorney fees. The court awarded Pulsar $22,500 in attorney fees. Bond appeals arguing the court erred in awarding Pulsar attorney fees, applied the wrong legal standard and failed to make the required findings in support of the award. We shall affirm the judgment.

Factual and Procedural Background

Bond brought suit against Pulsar alleging employment discrimination under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), breach of contract and various related common law torts. Pulsar brought a demurrer and motion to strike, which the court denied. Following arbitration, the case was returned to the civil active list.

Pulsar moved for summary judgment on all causes of action. In opposing Pulsar’s motion for summary judgment, Bond contended Pulsar’s owner, an African-American, had demanded that Bond represent himself while on business as an African-American. Bond, who is of mixed racial origins, considers himself…

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.