Lawana Porter v. California Department of Corrections

Good Law
419 F.3d 885·2005 WL 1845092·104 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 310·2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 16191
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 5, 200502-16537California5,250 words

Opinion

Opinion

Callahan, J.

ORDER AND AMENDED OPINION

ORDER

The opinion filed September 10, 2004, slip op. at 13197, is amended as follows:

Slip op. at 13197:

Slip op. at 13210:

Slip op. at 13211:

Slip op. at 13213:

Slip op. at 13215:

Slip op. at 13222:

The petition for rehearing is otherwise DENIED. See Fed. R.App. P. 40. The suggestion for rehearing en banc is DENIED. See Fed. R.App. P. 35. No further petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc will be accepted. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

OPINION

In May 2000, Lawana Porter filed a complaint pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, against the California Department of Corrections (“CDC”). Porter alleged that she was the victim of continuing sexual harassment, discrimination and retaliation as a result of her rejection of sexual advances by correctional officers Terry Wheeler and Pete DeSantis in 1995 and 1996.

The district court granted the CDC’s motion for summary judgment, holding that (1) the temporal gap between the complaints of sexual harassment and the alleged acts of retaliation precluded Porter from showing a causal link; and (2) the alleged incidents of sexual harassment could not be considered 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.