Skip to main content
· 11/11/1994

Martin v. Lockheed Missiles & Space Co.

Citations

  • 29 Cal. App. 4th 1718
  • 35 Cal. Rptr. 2d 181
  • 29 Cal. App. 2d 1718
  • 94 Daily Journal DAR 15942
  • 94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8615
  • 1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 1143
  • 68 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1225

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • describing an administrative history in which the claimant attempted to sue based on “theories of sexual discrimination, 28 harassment and retaliation” that were never formally presented to DFEH
  • “an EEOC right-to-sue notice satisfies the requirement of exhaustion of administrative remedies only for purposes of an action based on Title VII”
  • “[A]n 7 EEOC right-to-sue notice satisfies the requirement of exhaustion of administrative 8 remedies only for purposes of an action based on Title VII.”
  • “The timely filing of an administrative complaint is a prerequisite to the 23 bringing of a civil action for damages under the FEHA.”
  • “A defendant seeking summary 16 judgment must bear the initial burden of showing that the action has no merit, and the plaintiff will not 17 be required to respond unless and until the defendant has borne that burden”
  • “A defendant seeking summary judgment must 10 bear the initial burden of showing that the action has no merit, and the plaintiff will not be required to 11 respond unless and until the defendant has borne that burden”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bamattre-Manoukian

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.