Abram v. City & County of San Francisco Department of Public Health

Good Law
357 F. App'x 142
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 10, 200908-17434California645 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Susie Abram appeals the district court’s adverse summary judgment grant for her action under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 against the City and County of San Francisco (“City”), Department of Public Health, and William Frazier, Director of Therapeutic Activities, Laguna Honda Hospital. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we need not recount it here.

I

We review a district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo. Stratum v. Kirkland, 287 F.3d 821, 825 (9th Cir.2002). The court “must determine, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, whether the district court correctly applied the relevant substantive law and whether there are any genuine issues of material fact.” Balint v. Carson City, 180 F.3d 1047, 1050 (9th Cir.1999) (en banc).

Abram has not established a material issue of fact as to her claims of discrimination and retaliation. She has not alleged any statements or actions “prov[ing] the fact of [discriminatory or retaliatory] animus without inference or presumption.” Coghlan v. Am. Seafoods Co., 413 F.3d 1090, 1095 (9th Cir.2005) (internal quotations marks, alteration, and…

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.