Strother

Strother v. Southern California Permanente Medical Group

Caution
79 F.3d 859·1996 WL 99669·67 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 43,979·72 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 905·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 8711
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 8, 1996Nos. 94-56046, 94-56279California10,442 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wiggins, J.

Dr. Germaine D. Strother, a physician partner in the Southern California Perma-nente Medical Group (“Medical Group”), sued the Medical Group and two physician partners in the Medical Group alleging racial discrimination and retaliation under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 ; racial and gender discrimination and retaliation in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 12900 et seq.; race discrimination and retaliation in violation of Article I, § 8 of the California Constitution; and arbitrary gender and race discrimination in violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, Cal.Civ. Code §§ 51 and 51.5. The district court granted the Medical Group’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) on the FEHA discrimination claim, and the Medical Group’s motion for summary judgment on all other claims. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm in part and reverse and remand in part.

FACTS

Strother is an African-American female partner in the Medical Group, which provides medical services in Southern California to members of the Kaiser Permanente Health Plan. From 1985 to the present, Strother has worked as a family practice physician in 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.