Legal Opinion
Nealy v. City of Santa Monica
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 13, 2015No. B246634PublishedCited by 72 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FLIER, J.
Appellant Tony Nealy brought this action under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.) against his employer, the City of Santa Monica (the City), for disability discrimination, failure to provide reasonable accommodation, failure to engage in the interactive process, and retaliation. Nealy’s disability arose as a result of knee injuries while working for the City. The trial court granted the City’s motion for summary judgment. We find no triable issues of material fact and affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
1. Nealy’s Knee Injury in 2003
Nealy…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.California Supreme Court · 2001
- Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2000
- Saelzler v. Advanced Group 400California Supreme Court · 2001
- Romano v. Rockwell International, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1996
- Robert Dark v. Curry County Curry County Road Department Dan Crumley, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Curry County RoadmasterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by72 opinions
- Achal v. Gate Gourmet, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
- Atkins v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Dinslage v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- Weeks v. Union Pacific RailroadDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2015
- Canupp v. Children's Receiving Home of SacramentoDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2016
67 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.