Phil Pleasant, Jr. v. Dick Zais

399 F. App'x 201
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedOctober 6, 2010
Docket08-35958
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 399 F. App'x 201 (Phil Pleasant, Jr. v. Dick Zais) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Phil Pleasant, Jr. v. Dick Zais, 399 F. App'x 201 (9th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Phil Pleasant, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983 action alleging racial discrimination. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Lindsey v. SLT Los Angeles, LLC, 447 F.3d 1138, 1144 (9th Cir.2006). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendants because it is undisputed that Pleasant, an independent contractor, did not complete the project that he was hired to perform, and he failed to present evidence showing that the City’s hiring of another contractor to complete the work was based on racial discrimination. See id. (plaintiff must satisfy the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of racial discrimination). Accordingly, Pleasant failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendants discriminated against him based on race.

Pleasant’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Joseph Watkins v. Chicago Housing Authority
527 F. App'x 504 (Seventh Circuit, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
399 F. App'x 201, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phil-pleasant-jr-v-dick-zais-ca9-2010.