Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
California Supreme Court· 8/23/2001

Richards v. CH2M Hill, Inc.

Citations

  • 29 P.3d 175
  • 111 Cal. Rptr. 2d 87
  • 26 Cal. 4th 798
  • 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7347
  • 2001 Daily Journal DAR 9059
  • 12 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 129
  • 2001 Cal. LEXIS 5481

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that, because of similarity of state and federal statutes, in Title VII lawsuits, California courts look to federal decisions for guidance
  • holding that, because of similarity of state and federal statutes, in Title VII lawsuits, California courts look to federal decisions for guidance
  • holding that the doctrine “allows liability for unlawful employer conduct occurring outside the statute of limitations if it is sufficiently connected to unlawful conduct within the limitations period.”
  • recognizing that harassment often lacks the permanence that discriminatory actions have
  • viewing \the failure over time to reasonably accommodate a disabled employee as a single course of conduct\
  • determining the continuing violations doctrine applies when an employer’s multiple unlawful actions are sufficiently similar in kind, occur with reasonable frequency, and have not acquired a degree of permanence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brown, Werdegar

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

96 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

48 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Richards v. CH2M Hill, Inc.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

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.