Vargas

Vargas v. Gromko

Good Law
97 Daily Journal DAR 13911·977 F. Supp. 996·1997 WL 587004·1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15486
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 5, 1997C-96-20572 EAICalifornia4,719 words

Opinion

Opinion

Infante, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

I. INTRODUCTION

On July 7, 1997, Defendants Gerald J. Gromko and the County of Monterey (“the County”) filed a motion for Summary judgment. Plaintiff opposed the motion. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ motion is GRANTED.

II. BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint (the “FAC”) alleges that Plaintiff was discriminatorily discharged on the basis of race, national origin and/or disability from his employment as a maintenance worker for the Monterey County Public Works Department (“the Public Works Department”). The FAC attempts to state claims against Defendants under (1) 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”); (2) Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 12900 et seq. (the “Fair Employment and Housing Act” or “FEHA”); (3) 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“ § 1983”); (4) 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (“§ 1981”); (5) 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq. (the “Americans with Disabilities Act” or “ADA”); and (6) the common and statutory law and the Constitution of the State of California (the “non-FEHA state law claims”). Defendants contend that Plaintiff was terminated because he threatened to kill his three supervisors at the Public Works Department — Ronald…

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.