Jenkins

Jenkins v. County of Riverside

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 8, 200503-55412California2,383 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. Background

Jenkins was hired by the County as an “Office Assistant II” (“OA-II”) on May 14, 1992. As the deposition testimony of her supervisor makes clear, she was hired to work at a local hospital to “clean up a tremendous backlog of fetal monitor- ing strips which were piled in the hospital’s basement,” “fin- ished that task within a few months and less than six months after she was hired,” and when she completed that task, was “trained and assigned with the rest of the regular staff to per- form the ongoing work of the [nursing] department.” As the district court stated, “[i]t is undisputed that the position Plain- tiff held was designated a temporary position, and at all times Plaintiff was designated a temporary employee. Plaintiff worked full-time and continuously in this position until her termination on or about May 26 or 27, 1998.”

While employed as an OA-II, Jenkins consistently received exemplary performance reviews and worked well in excess of the annual 1,000-hour ceiling that County Ordinance 440 placed on temporary employees.3 During her employment at 3 As here relevant, the Ordinance provides: No temporary employee shall be permitted to work in the same…

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.