Jefferson

Jefferson v. City of Fremont

Good Law
73 F. Supp. 3d 1133·2014 WL 5794330·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157307
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 6, 2014No. C-12-0926 EMCCalifornia9,045 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chen, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

(Docket Nos. 96, 110)

In this case, Mr. Jefferson has alleged discriminatory treatment and harassment relating to his use of the Fremont Tennis Center (“FTC”). The operative complaint, the Third Amended Complaint, Docket No. 67 (“TAC”), names the municipality of the City of Fremont, the FTC, and individual Jeff Gonce, who was the Tennis Director of the FTC. Mr. Gonce is named in his official capacity. The TAC alleges the following three causes of action: (1) Violation of Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title II”); (2) Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (“Section 1981”); and (3) Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”) based on Mr. Jefferson’s right to contract under Section 1981. Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, Docket No. 96 (“Motion”), on the three claims in the TAC against the City of Fremont and Mr. Gonce.

Mr. Jefferson filed this action as a pro se litigant in 2012. After filing his first amended complaint, Mr. Jefferson retained counsel, who withdrew in June of 2014. See Docket No. 92. Prior to counsel’s withdrawal, counsel represented Mr. Jefferson in connection with…

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.