Santiago

Santiago v. Lamont Elementary School Dist. CA5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 17, 2022F081465California11,745 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 11/17/22 Santiago v. Lamont Elementary School Dist. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

MARY SANTIAGO,

F081465

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. BCV-17-100875) v.

LAMONT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OPINION

DISTRICT,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Stephen D. Schuett, Judge.

Law Offices of Parnell Fox and Parnell Fox for Plaintiff and Appellant. Herr Pedersen & Berglund, Leonard C. Herr and Caren L. Curtiss for Defendant and Respondent. -ooOoo- Mary Santiago (plaintiff) was employed as a receptionist by the Lamont Elementary School District (defendant) for 19 years. She had tardiness and attendance issues throughout her career, especially during her last three years on…

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.