Aurelia SCHOLAR, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. PACIFIC BELL, a Pacific Telesis Company, a Corporation, Defendant/Appellee

Good Law
92 Daily Journal DAR 5910·963 F.2d 264·1992 WL 85130·58 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 41,440·58 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1248
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 30, 199290-15939California1,876 words

Opinion

Opinion

Burns, J.

Ms. Scholar appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Pacific Bell and dismissal of her claims for relief arising from alleged discriminatory employ ment practices by Pacific Bell, 1990 WL 364626 . Ms. Scholar also appeals the district court’s denial of her motion for leave to file a second amended complaint.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1988).

BACKGROUND

Ms. Scholar was an employee of Pacific Bell and its predecessor entity for approximately 17 years. She was employed in nonsalaried, nonmanagement positions governed by collective bargaining agreements. In 1980 Ms. Scholar’s name was included in Pacific Bell’s “Ready Now” Binder, a list of nonsalaried employees selected by their supervisors as candidates for promotion to management as positions became available. Although Ms. Scholar was never promoted to a management position during her long tenure with Pacific Bell, she does not challenge Pacific Bell’s employment practices prior to the events triggering this dispute.

In 1986 employees listed in the Ready Now Binder were reevaluated. Ms. Scholar’s name was removed from the binder in 1987 following a fresh performance evaluation by her immediate…

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.