Steven Cabasa v. City & County of Honolulu

712 F. App'x 698
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided February 21, 2018·No. 15-16597·Unpublished

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Steven Cabasa appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the City and County of Honolulu, Department of Environmental Services (the City) on his claim that the City retaliated against him for protected conduct in violation of the Hawaii Whistleblower Protection Act (HWPA), Haw. Rev. Stat. § 378-62. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

It is undisputed that a candidate for the Wastewater Pumping Operations Supervisor position must receive at least a 70% score on the promotional examination to be considered for the position and that Caba-sa received a 57.5% score on the examination. Accordingly, there is no genuine issue of material fact that the City would not have promoted Cabasa “regardless of the protected activity.” Crosby v. State Dep’t of Budget & Fin., 76 Haw. 332, 342, 876 P.2d 1300 (1994) (quoting NLRB v. Howard Elec. Co., 873 F.2d 1287, 1290 (9th Cir. 1989)).

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

Steven Cabasa v. City & County of Honolulu, 712 F. App'x 698 (9th Cir. 2018).

712 F. App'x 698 (Steven Cabasa v. City & County of Honolulu) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Crosby v. State of Hawai'i Department of Budget & Finance
876 P.2d 1300 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1994)