Estella Lucero v. Dennis B. Hart, Rugh J. Papp, and Susie Mitchell

Good Law
915 F.2d 1367·1990 WL 142006·1 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1697·54 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 40,315·54 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 75
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 3, 199088-15524California2,418 words

Opinion

Opinion

Poole, J.

Appellant Estella Lucero was hired by the County of Sacramento under its Career Opportunities Development Rehabilitation Program. She was subsequently terminated after county officials learned she had been appointed to a permanent position for which she did not meet the minimum qualifications and reasonable efforts to accommodate her failed. Appellant subsequently brought a claim against three of the county officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The district court granted summary judgment on both claims. Jurisdiction is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On or about November 17, 1986, appellant Estella Lucero was hired as a re-entry worker by the County of Sacramento under the Sacramento County Career Opportunities Development-Rehabilitation Program. Under the program, the county agrees to place clients of the State Department of Rehabilitation in county positions in return for funding from the state for 90% of the cost of such positions. Re-entry workers such as appellant are placed in county positions for a six month training period which may be extended for an additional period of up to three months. At the…

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.