Silo

Silo v. CHW Medical Foundation

Good Law
103 Cal. Rptr. 2d 825·86 Cal. App. 4th 947
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 16, 2001C022895, C024033California7,774 words

Opinion

Opinion

Defendants CHW Medical Foundation, Mary King, and Ruth Ann Lewis appeal from a judgment and an award of attorney fees in plaintiff Terence Silo's action for religious discrimination in employment. In our previous opinion, filed November 25, 1997, we determined that CHW Medical Foundation (CHWMF), as a religiously affiliated nonprofit corporation, is an employer under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov.Code, § 12900 et seq.). Further, we concluded that King and Lewis, as supervisors, are not liable for acts of discrimination. Finally, we found no abuse of discretion in failing to apply a fractional multiplier to the lodestar attorney fee request under FEHA. We declined to determine whether Silo was entitled to attorney fees under the private attorney general doctrine of Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5.

The California Supreme Court granted review. On September 13, 2000, the California Supreme Court transferred the case to our court with directions to vacate our prior decision and to reconsider the cause in light of McKeon v. Mercy Healthcare Sacramento (1998) 19 Cal.4th 321 , 79 Cal. Rptr.2d 319 , 965 P.2d 1189 and Kelly v. Methodist…

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.