Capitol City Foods, Inc. v. Superior Court

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 557·5 Cal. App. 4th 1042·7 Cal. Rptr. 2d 418·92 Daily Journal DAR 5668·58 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1150
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 27, 1992C011792California3,166 words

Opinion

Opinion

Marler, J.

This case raises the issue of an employer’s liability for sexual harassment due to the conduct of a supervisory employee while off duty and not at the workplace. The superior court granted defendant Capitol City Foods, Inc.’s motion for summary judgment on all remaining causes of action in plaintiff Mary T.’s lawsuit except the first cause of action for sexual harassment. Defendant petitioned this court for a writ of mandate directing the trial court to grant the motion for summary judgment in its entirety. Defendant contends the undisputed facts reveal an insufficient nexus between the supervisor’s conduct and his employment to hold the employer liable. We shall order that the writ issue.

Factual and Procedural Background

Mary T. began working at defendant’s Burger King franchise in January of 1989. Vernon Johnson was the night shift supervisor. On January 29, Mary and a coworker asked Johnson to go with them for a drink. Johnson could not go then, but suggested another time. Mary and Johnson made arrangements to go out on the 31st. They both believed the coworker would accompany them. Neither Johnson nor Mary was scheduled to work that day, but unbeknownst to Johnson,…

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.