Brenda BRUSH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SAN FRANCISCO NEWSPAPER PRINTING COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee
469 F.2d 89·5 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 7981·5 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 20·1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 7504
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 19, 197226666California107 words
Opinion
The judgment of the district court against Brush is affirmed.
The object of the complaint was to stop the San Francisco Chronicle and the San Francisco Examiner (published by the San Francisco Newspaper Printing Company) from using in employment ads classifications of male and female.
To rule with plaintiff-appellant would require the district court and us to find that the defendant, when it publishes help wanted ads, is an employment agency. Neither the dictionary nor the legislative history supports this construction. The legislative history contributes little.
We are in substantial agreement with the district court’s opinion. Brush v. San Francisco Newspaper Printing Company, 315 F.Supp. 577 (1970).