Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Horace Chester Brown, Jr v. Fresno Unified School District

March 6, 2013

HORACE CHESTER BROWN, JR., PLAINTIFF,
v.
FRESNO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge Eastern District OF California

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING THAT THIS CASE BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION (Doc. 12)

Third Screening Order

Plaintiff Horace Chester Brown, Jr., proceeding in forma pauperis, filed his second amended complaint on February 25, 2012. Because Plaintiffs' complaint fails to state a federal claim upon which relief can be granted, the undersigned recommends that the Court dismiss it.

I. Screening Requirement

The Court must screen any case in which a plaintiff proceeds in forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915. It must dismiss any case, regardless of the fee paid, if the action or appeal is (1) frivolous or malicious; (2) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (3) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B).

II. Summary of Alleged Facts*fn1

Plaintiff (born March 15, 1956) began work as a custodian for Defendant on June 21, 1999.

While employed by Defendant, Plaintiff was a member of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and subject to the terms of a collective bargaining agreement. Plaintiff's compensation included medical insurance. Plaintiff also purchased through Defendant subsidized disability insurance from American Fidelity Insurance Company. Defendant owns American Fidelity Insurance Company.

On or about March 1, 2000, Plaintiff began to show symptoms of severe acid reflux, tightened chest and airways, gagging, and signs of heart attacks. On or about May 1, 2000, Plaintiff had his first appointment with his primary care physician, Dr. Sandhu at Northwest Medical Group. From May 1, 2000, until the end of his employment in April 2011, Plaintiff was treated by several physicians and specialists. Plaintiff always notified Defendant of his absences for doctors' appointments, first exhausting his sick and vacation days to do so, and eventually taking time off without pay.

In October 2010, medical specialist Muhammed Shied notified Defendant's disability benefits department that Plaintiff would be unable to work from October 13, 2010 through July 11, 2011. In January 2011, Dr. Rahim Raoufi confirmed that Plaintiff had suffered intractable and chronic hiccups for the past twelve years. In a letter to Defendant's Human Resources and Labor Relations department, Dr. Raoufi reported:

The patient has undergo extensive workup and also has more work to be done . . . We recommend that the patient . . . wears a mask and gloves as he works as custodian in contact with lost so waste [sic] material at an elementary school. We recommend that he should avoid dust and working with disinfectant. We also recommend that he should have a separate cushion and wear a mask if he is shampooing or vacuuming. Overall, he should avoid contact with any chemical and dust as much as possible. Doc. 12 at 36.

Dr. Raoufi did not clear Plaintiff to return to work before July 11, 2011.

Defendant called Plaintiff back to work in March 2011. In meetings with the Job Modification Committee on March 24 and 31, 2011, personnel advised Plaintiff that he needed to work "just 30 more days" from March 31, 2011, to qualify for retirement. Later, Plaintiff learned that his correct retirement date would have been April 14, 2011.

Relying on the information that the Job Modification Committee provided, Plaintiff returned to work on April 12, 2011, and suffered a stroke the same day. Plaintiff's physicians attributed the stroke to stress on ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.