Anna M. Douglas v. State of California, Franchise Tax Board

92 F.3d 1191 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Anna M. DOUGLAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FRANCHISE TAX BOARD, Defendant-Appellee. No. 93-56229, 95-55110. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 13, 1995. Decided July 31, 1996. Before: SCHROEDER, FERGUSON, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Douglas contends that the district court applied the incorrect standard in its analysis of her summary judgment claim. Specifically, she argues that the court should have applied a standard applicable to discriminatory discipline rather than to discriminatory discharge. She argues that an employee discharged for disciplinary reasons is unable to satisfy the discriminatory discharge prima facie test even in cases of extreme disciplinary discrimination. Douglas insists that the court should have adopted one of the prima facie discharge models established by the Fourth, Fifth, or Eleventh Circuits which take…