Trujillo v. North County Transit Dist.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that there is no failure to prevent discrimination if discrimination did not occur
• concluding that 26 “[e]mployers should not be held liable to employees for failure to take necessary steps to prevent 27 such conduct, except where the actions took place and were not prevented”
• holding that the statutory language of § 12940 does not “support[] recovery on . . . a private right of action where there has been a specific factual finding that [the alleged] discrimination or harassment actually occurred at the plaintiffs’s workplace”
• holding that the statutory language of § 12940 does not “support[] recovery on . . . a private right of action where there has been a specific factual finding that [the alleged] discrimination or harassment actually occurred at the plaintiffs’s workplace”
• holding no failure to prevent 1 discrimination claim can exist without a FEHA discrimination claim
• finding that § 12940(k) does not support recovery “where there has been a specific factual finding that no such discrimination or harassment actually occurred at the plaintiffs’ workplace.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).