Burch

Burch v. Regents of the University of California

Bad Law
433 F. Supp. 2d 1110·2006 WL 1555454
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 5, 2006CV.S-04-0038-WBS-GGHCalifornia12,859 words

Opinion

Opinion

Shubb, J.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Plaintiffs have filed claims against defendants for violations of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681-1688 , and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . These claims are based on allegations that defendants terminated plaintiff Michael D. Burch from his position as head wrestling coach at the University of California at Davis (“UCD”) because he opposed defendants’ sex discrimination against female athletes and publicly advocated on the athletes’ behalf. Currently before the court are defendants two (separate) motions for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. The first seeks summary judgment as to all defendants on both claims due to plaintiffs inability to show that he was retaliated against. The second seeks summary judgment on plaintiffs § 1983 claim against defendant Larry Vanderhoef.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

Beginning in 1995, UCD employed plaintiff as its head men’s wresting coach through a series of one-year contracts. (Compl. ¶ 5.) Plaintiff was classified as a part-time employee with the Athletic Department, but he also served as a lecturer in the Religious Studies…

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.