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
Hostile Work Environment
Religion Discrimination

Bahar Mikhak v. University of Phoenix Inc., et al.

Published: Mar. 31, 2023 | Result Date: Dec. 7, 2022 | Filing Date: Sep. 7, 2021 |

Case number: 3:21-cv-06919-CRB Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Judge

Charles R. Breyer

Court

USDC Northern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Pro Per


Defendant

Marlene S. Muraco
(Littler Mendelson PC)


Facts

Bahar Mikhak brought an action against her former employer, University of Phoenix, Inc. (UOP) and individual UOP employees, contending that the UOP defendants failed to hire or promote her because of her religion, subjected her to a hostile work environment, and retaliated against her, all in violation of Title VII and the Fair Employment and Housing Act.

The court granted UOP's motion to compel arbitration but ultimately dismissed the case for failure to prosecute.

Thereafter, Mikhak filed a new case, again suing UOP and individual UOP employees, as well as the law firm Littler Mendelson, P.C. and individual attorneys who had represented UOP in the first lawsuit.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that Littler Mendelson and the attorney defendants committed fraud, and violated related statutes, by making false representations to the court in the course of the first litigation. Plaintiff also asserted that the UOP defendants committed fraud, and violated related statutes, by drafting and implementing the arbitration agreement improperly, by lying to the court in the course of the first litigation, and by giving a false reference when a prospective employer inquired about plaintiff.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied all contentions.

Result

Defendants' motion to dismiss was granted.


#140500

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

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