Brown

Brown v. Potter

Good Law
285 F. App'x 421
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 10, 2008No. 06-16976California424 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Johnnie L. Brown appeals pro se from the district court’s partial summary judgment and judgment after a bench trial in her action alleging employment discrimination and retaliation. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review summary judgment de novo. Little v. Windermere Relocation, Inc., 301 F.3d 958, 966 (9th Cir.2002). We review findings of fact after a bench trial for clear error, and conclusions of law de novo. Lentini v. Cal. Ctr. for the Arts, Escondi do, 370 F.3d 837, 843 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Brown’s constructive termination claim because Brown did not exhaust her administrative remedies as to that claim. See Ong v. Cleland, 642 F.2d 316, 318-19 (9th Cir.1981) (“Whether a plaintiff has in fact exhausted his or her administrative remedies depends on an analysis of the fit between the administrative charges brought and investigated and the allegations of the subsequent judicial complaint.”) (internal quotation marks omitted).

The district court did not err by entering judgment for defendant on Brown’s retaliation claim because she presented no credible evidence that the…

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.