Arnold B. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EDWARD APFFELS COFFEE COMPANY, Bill Berry and J.C. Hill, Defendants-Appellees

Good Law
792 F.2d 1482·41 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 36,509·41 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 396·1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 26662
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 1, 198685-6204California2,969 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nelson, J.

Arnold B. Williams appeals pro se from the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Edward Apffels Coffee Company. He contends that the district court erred in finding that: (1) no genuine issue of material fact remained as to whether Apffels had discriminated against Williams on the basis of race and age; (2) Williams had not alleged sufficient facts to state a cause of action under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act; and (3) Williams had not alleged sufficient facts to support his action in tort for fraud and deceit. We find Williams’ contentions are correct. Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment, and remand for further proceedings.

I

FACTS

Between 1979 and 1981, Arnold B. Williams, an elderly black male, worked intermittently, for a total of twenty-two months, as a temporary or “casual” employee of the Edward Apffels Coffee Company (Apffels). Williams made oral requests to be considered for available permanent jobs on at least three occasions, and Apffels acknowledges that it regarded Williams as an applicant. In each case, Apffels hired someone other than Williams for the permanent position.

Williams’ last request…

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.