Zhou

Zhou v. Ruess CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 15, 2016C073405California5,739 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

Defendant Redding Pathologists is a partnership. In May 2008, the partners were defendants William R. Ruess, M.D., Don V. Stanton, M.D., Tikoes A. Blankenberg, M.D., and Mark W. Ramus, M.D. Defendant Sean D. Pitman, M.D., was an employee in 2008 and later became a partner. Blankenberg was responsible for the partnership’s personnel decisions. For convenience, we refer to this group of defendants collectively as defendants. In early 2008, plaintiff, then working as a pathologist for a different pathology practice, called Blankenberg to see if there were any openings at Redding Pathologists. At the time there were none. In May 2008, Blankenberg called plaintiff, said they may have an opening, and asked if she was still interested. She was. He invited her to meet with him and the other partners. The meeting occurred at Ruess’s home. Over the course of two hours, the partners asked plaintiff about her current job to understand why she was unhappy there. They asked her about her qualifications and background. She presented her resume, and they discussed it. They discussed employment with her. In his deposition, Blankenberg stated the partners outlined at the meeting in very…

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.