Jennifer Schoultz v. Wells Fargo Bank

Good Law
670 F. App'x 646
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 18, 201615-55326California390 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff-Appellant Jennifer Schoultz (“Schoultz”) appeals from the United States District Court for the Central District of California’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendant-Appellee Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”), on Schoultz’s claims under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”). Our review is de novo. Devereaux v. Abbey, 268 F.3d 1070, 1074 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc). “We must determine, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court correctly applied the substantive law.” Adcock v. Chrysler Corp., 166 F.3d 1290, 1292 (9th Cir. 1999); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a).

The district court correctly granted summary judgment in Wells Fargo’s favor on Schoultz’s disability discrimination and retaliation claims after applying the burden-shifting test established by the United States Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 , 93 S.Ct. 1817 , 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973). See Guz v. Bechtel Nat’l Inc., 24 Cal.4th 317, 354 , 100 Cal.Rptr.2d 352 , 8 P.3d 1089 (2000) (McDonnell Douglas test applies to FEHA disability…

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.