Gondek v. Hebhardt

Docket: Nos. 02-35443, 02-35445; D.C. No. CV-01-00098-A-HRH

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; February 2, 2003; Federal Appellate Court

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

The memorandum addresses a civil rights and employment discrimination case involving Donna Gondek, a school teacher, who alleged gender discrimination related to her transfer to another school. The district court ruled in favor of all defendants, and upon review, the appellate court found no errors warranting reversal, thus affirming the lower court's decision.

Key points include:

1. **Background**: The Gondeks appealed the district court's summary judgment on Donna’s Title VII claim, asserting she was forced to transfer due to gender discrimination.

2. **District Court Rulings**: Before the summary judgment on the Title VII claim, the district court granted:
- Eleventh Amendment immunity to the school district and its officials for civil rights, age discrimination, and common law tort claims.
- Dismissal of the case against the prosecuting attorney based on immunity.
- Dismissal of the case against an investigating police officer after Larry Gondek’s voluntary dismissal.

3. **Title VII Legal Standards**: Under Title VII, to prove gender discrimination, Donna needed to establish:
- She belongs to a protected class.
- She was qualified for her position.
- She experienced an adverse employment action.
- Similarly situated male employees were treated more favorably.
- For a hostile work environment claim, she needed to show unwelcome sexual conduct that was severe or pervasive enough to alter her employment conditions.

4. **Court's Findings**: The appellate court agreed with the district court that Donna Gondek did not establish a prima facie case of either disparate treatment or hostile work environment. There was insufficient evidence or allegations demonstrating differential treatment based on gender or severe conduct creating a hostile work environment.

5. **Conclusion**: The court upheld the summary judgment in favor of the defendants, affirming the district court’s ruling without the need for publication or citation in future cases, as per Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.