Harrison

Harrison v. Wells Fargo Bank

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 20, 20203:18-cv-07824California2,544 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

9

10 PATRINA HARRISON, 11 Plaintiff, No. C 18-07824 WHA

12 v.

13 WELLS FARGO BANK, et al., ORDER GRANTING

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

14 Defendants.

15 16 INTRODUCTION 17 In this race discrimination case, defendant bank moves for summary judgment. Because 18 it offers a legitimate, non-pretextual reason for denial of credit, plaintiff’s claims under 42 19 U.S.C. § 1982, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and the Fair Housing Act fail. And because 20 plaintiff completed all deposits requested of the bank, her claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 also 21 fail. For these and the reasons stated below, the motion is GRANTED. 22 STATEMENT 23 On or about June 4, 2018, pro se plaintiff Patrina Harrison applied for Wells Fargo’s pre- 24 approval of a one million dollar mortgage on an unspecified two-and-a-half million dollar San 25 Francisco property with an income of approximately thirteen hundred dollars per month and 26 liquid assets…

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.