Valerie Taybron Trinna Lynnelle Davis v. City and County of San Francisco

Good Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 9879·341 F.3d 957·2003 WL 22020250·84 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 41,458·92 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 940
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 28, 200302-15850California1,491 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fletcher, J.

Valerie Taybron and Trinna Davis (“Appellants”) assert that their employer, the City and County of San Francisco (“Appel-lee”), violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000 et seq. They complain that Appellee (1) subjected them to a hostile workplace rife with sexual harassment and failed to take appropriate remedial steps when they complained, and (2) retaliated against them for complaining. Appellee moved for summary judgment on all claims. The district judge held there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether a hostile workplace existed, but held that Appellee had taken timely remedial measures sufficient to remedy their complaints. He held that no material triable facts existed to support the retaliation claim. He dismissed both claims.

Whether genuine issues of material fact exist that preclude summary judgment is our concern. The district judge noted in dismissing Appellants’ claims that their trial attorney had done a notably poor job of compiling and organizing the “Opposition to Appellee’s Notice of Motion and Motion for Summary Judgment” (“Opposition”). He noted that the Opposition’s factual assertions were often unconnected to…

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.