Scholink
Scholink v. Salinas Valley Mem. Healthcare Syst. CA6
Opinion
Opinion
Elia, J.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY2
Plaintiff worked for Hospital from April 1998 until July 2011 in the cardiology department as a sonographer. Plaintiff is an insulin-dependent diabetic. He also suffers from chronic depression. It was undisputed that Hospital is a public entity. Plaintiff’s second amended complaint (the operative pleading) alleges: (1) disability discrimination and failure to accommodate based on facts occurring while Plaintiff was still employed by Hospital prior to July 2011, and (2) wrongful termination and breach of an implied contract of employment based on his termination in July 2011. We shall organize our discussion of the facts and procedural history around these two separate time frames.
2 The record does not contain any of the evidence submitted by either party in support of or in opposition to the motion for summary judgment. Since none of that evidence is before this court, the facts are based on the parties’ separate statements. Although we do not have a complete record of the motion for summary judgment, the record is adequate to review the legal issue presented in this appeal.