Edna MILLER et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al., Defendants and Respondents.
Supreme Court of California.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
July 18, 2005.
July 18, 2005.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Lawless & Lawless, Barbara A. Lawless, Aelish M. Baig, San Francisco, and Sonya L. Smallets, for Plaintiffs and Appellants.
Law Offices of Philip Edward Kay, and Lawrence A. Organ, San Francisco, for The Civil Rights Forum as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Appellants.
Law Offices of Jeffrey K. Winikow and Jeffrey K. Winikow, Los Angeles, for California Employment Lawyers Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Appellants.
The Lucas Law Firm and Kathleen M. Lucas, San Francisco, for Equal Rights Advocates as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Appellants.
The Sturdevant Law Firm, James C. Sturdevant, San Francisco; Law Offices of Daniel U. Smith, Daniel U. Smith, Kentfield; Ian Herzog, Santa Monia; Michael Adler, Los Angeles; Sharon J. Arkin, Newport Beach; Stuart B. Esner, Los Angeles; Brian S. Kabateck, Los Angeles; David A. Rosen, Los Angeles; Christine D. Spagnoli; Lea-Ann Tratten, Steven B. Stevens, Los Angeles; and Scott H.Z. Sumner, Walnut Creek, for Consumer Attorneys of California as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Appellants.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Jacob Appelsmith, Assistant Attorney General, Vincent J. Scally, Jr., Timothy G. Yeung, Diana L. Cuomo and David J. Neill, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendants and Respondents.
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, Rebecca D. Eisen, Thomas M. Peterson and Shannon B. Nakabayashi, San Francisco, for The Employers Group as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Respondents.
Supreme Court of California.
GEORGE, C.J.
Plaintiffs, two former employees at the Valley State Prison for Women, claim that the warden of the prison at which they were employed accorded unwarranted favorable treatment to numerous female employees with whom the warden was having sexual affairs, and that such conduct constituted sexual harassment in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). (Gov.Code, § 12900 et seq.) The trial court granted summary judgment in favor...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
