Legal Opinion

Jumaane v. City of Los Angeles

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 10, 2015No. B255763PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

GRIMGES, J.

Defendant, the City of Los Angeles (City), appeals from the trial court’s order denying the City’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict following the second trial of plaintiff Jabari Jumaane’s employment claims. We conclude most of plaintiff’s claims are barred by the statute of limitations, and the evidence of events within the limitations period was insufficient to establish a prima facie case of disparate impact discrimination, harassment or retaliation. The City’s motion should have been granted in its entirety. Thus, we reverse the judgment and remand for…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & TrustSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Yanowitz v. L'OREAL USA, INC.California Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Skelly v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Reno v. BairdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Caldera v. Dep't of Corr. & Rehab., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  2. Wassmann v. S. Orange Cnty. Cmty. Coll. Dist., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  3. Brown v. City of Sacramento, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
  4. Blue Fountain Pools and Spas Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
  5. Brown v. City of SacramentoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2019

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API