You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Freund v. Sierra Pacific Resources Nevada Power Co.

Citation: 319 F. App'x 636Docket: No. 07-16937

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; March 17, 2009; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves an appeal following the district court's summary judgment in favor of Sierra Pacific Resources and Nevada Power Company against the plaintiff's claims of age discrimination, retaliation, wrongful termination, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The plaintiff alleged age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and state law, but the court found that he failed to establish a prima facie case, as he was replaced by more qualified employees. Additionally, in his retaliation claim, the plaintiff was unable to present a triable issue against the employer’s justification of poor job performance following departmental restructuring. The claim of wrongful termination under state law was deemed waived due to inadequate legal argumentation. Furthermore, the court upheld the summary judgment on the claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, citing an absence of evidence of conduct that would be considered intolerable in a civilized society. Ultimately, the appellate court affirmed the lower court's ruling, noting the disposition is unpublished and non-precedential pursuant to 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Legal Issues Addressed

ADEA Age Discrimination Claims

Application: The court upheld the summary judgment in favor of the defendants, as the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination under the ADEA.

Reasoning: Freund was unable to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination, as he was replaced by employees with superior qualifications.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

Application: The plaintiff's claim failed due to lack of evidence of intolerable conduct by the employer, which is required to support such a claim.

Reasoning: The court found no error in granting summary judgment on Freund's claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, as he failed to provide evidence of conduct by NPC that was deemed utterly intolerable in a civilized community.

Retaliation Claims under Employment Law

Application: Even assuming a prima facie case of retaliation, the plaintiff could not dispute the employer's legitimate reason for termination, which was poor job performance.

Reasoning: Regarding Freund's retaliation claim, even if he established a prima facie case, he did not create a triable issue regarding NPC's stated reason for termination—poor job performance.

Waiver of Legal Claims

Application: The plaintiff waived his wrongful termination claim under state law by failing to provide necessary legal arguments.

Reasoning: Freund also waived his claim of state law wrongful termination due to a lack of legal argumentation on the matter.