Sherill Ford-Torres v. Cascade Valley Telecom, Inc.

MEMORANDUM

Sherrill Ford-Torres appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants Jadent, Inc. (“Jadent”), Dennis O’Shea (“Dennis”), and Thomas O’Shea (“Tom”) on her sex discrimination, state-law tort, and fraudulent transfer claims. Defendants cross-appeal from the district court’s denial of sanctions against plaintiffs counsel under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(c)(1)(A). We review grants of summary judgment de novo. Balint v. Carson City Nev., 180 F.3d 1047, 1050 (9th Cir.1999). We affirm.

I

A

With respect to Ford-Torres’ sex discrimination claims, the district court properly concluded that Jadent could not be considered Ford-Torres’s “employer” under Oregon or federal law.

Oregon courts recognize the indirect employer theory only in the context of Employer’s Liability Law claims, see Boothby v. D.R. Johnson Lumber Co., 184 Or.App. 138 , 55 P.3d 1113, 1116-17 (2002), and the joint employer theory only in the context of workers’ compensation claims, see Liberty Nw. Ins. Corp. v. McDonald, 187 Or. App. 40 , 66 P.3d 528, 530 (2003). Ford-Torres raises neither type of claim.

Under Title VII, the purported indirect employer must be “the…