Fredericks v. Maya Steel Fabrication
Filed 2/23/06 Fredericks v. Maya Steel Fabrication CA2/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
BENNIE FREDERICKS,
Plaintiff and Appellant,
v.
MAYA STEEL FABRICATIONS, INC.,
Defendant and Respondent.
| B180755
(Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC303375)
|
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Frances Rothchild, Judge. Affirmed.
James A. Otto for Plaintiff and Appellant.
Avila & Peros, Michael F. Avila and John P. Kristensen for Defendant and Respondent.
BACKGROUND
Appellant Bennie Fredericks commenced this action on October 1, 2003, by filing a complaint for damages due to respondent's alleged failure to accommodate his disability, in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), in particular, Government Code section 12940, and a violation of the California Family Rights Act (CFRA), as set forth in Government Code section 12945.2, as well as intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress.[1]
On November 12, 2004, the trial court granted respondent's motion for summary judgment, finding that respondent had met its initial burden, and that appellant failed to raise a triable issue of fact with regard to the disability alleged in the complaint, a lung injury sustained on the job. The court rejected appellant's attempt to raise a triable issue of fact with regard to disability discrimination based upon a different medical condition. Judgment was entered in favor of respondent on December 2, 2004, and appellant filed a timely notice of appeal on January 21, 2005.
DISCUSSION
We review summary judgments de novo, â€
