This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Employment Law
Race Discrimination
Age and Sex Discrimination

Rochelle Gray v. David J. Shulkin

Published: Feb. 8, 2019 | Result Date: Dec. 11, 2018 | Filing Date: Jul. 14, 2017 |

Case number: 4:17-cv-03973-HSG Summary Judgment –  Defense

Judge

Haywood S. Gilliam Jr.

Court

USDC Northern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Pro Per


Defendant

Pamela T. Johann
(Office of the U.S. Attorney)


Facts

Rochelle Gray, an elderly African American woman, filed an employment discrimination lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, against the Secretary of Veterans Affairs in relation to her termination from the Veterans' Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Gray contended that defendant fired her as a result of age and race discrimination. Gray argued that from 2011 until her termination in 2016 her supervisor identified negative performance, placed her on probation, and ultimately fired her. Grey further argued that her supervisor's discrimination was due to Gray's gender, race, and sex.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant contended that no evidence had been produced to meet a prima facie case for discrimination. Defendant argued that Gray failed to show any instance where she was treated less favorably than any other employee under a similar situation.

Result

The court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment and denied defendant's motion for additional discovery. The court determined that Gray provided no evidence apart from conclusory statements, failing to meet the very low prima facie standard for a showing of discrimination. The court also found that Gray failed to establish a basis for additional discover because her motion failed to make a showing of specific facts.


#130979

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390