Ginda

Ginda v. Exel Logistics, Inc.

Good Law
42 F. Supp. 2d 1019·99 Daily Journal DAR 8963·1999 WL 225563·1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5167
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 15, 1999Civ.S-98-0239FCDDADCalifornia2,694 words

Opinion

Opinion

Damrell, J.

MODIFIED MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Plaintiff Narash Ginda brings this diversity action alleging that he was harassed and discriminated against based on his race, national origin and religious beliefs in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), Cal.Gov. Code § 12900, et seq., and public policy. Plaintiff further contends that he complained of said harassment and discrimination, and as a result, was retaliated against in violation of FEHA, id. Plaintiffs complaint includes a claim for punitive damages. Defendant Excel Logistics, Inc. (“Exel”) moves this court for an order summarily adjudicating plaintiffs punitive damage claim on the ground that “the undisputed evidence establishes that the alleged conduct [which forms the gravamen of plaintiffs complaint] was neither taken nor ratified by any ‘managing agent’ of [Exel] as required to hold [Exel] liable for punitive damages under California law.” Because the court finds there exists a triable issue of material fact as to whether the alleged conduct complained of by plaintiff was taken or ratified by a managing agent of Excel, Excel’s motion is denied.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff, an East Indian, was employed by…

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.