Richard R. Hubbard v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc., et al.

Petitioner Richard Hubbard worked as a registered nurse for Respondent Kaiser Foundation Hospitals in the city of San Diego within the State of California. Petitioner was terminated from employment by the Respondent and received a Right to Sue from the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) of the State of California with a primary claim of gender discrimination. Petitioner first filed a complaint in California state court, but later filed the complaint in Federal Court, having determined there were federal issues implicated. The state case was dismissed without prejudice. The federal court judge determined the complaint was timely filed between both the DFEH and EEOC, due in part to a work-sharing agreement existed between both state and federal agencies. The Respondent later reintroduced the claim of timeliness pertaining to the timely filing his EEOC complaint, and were awarded summary judgement by the lower court, particularly on the central argument that Petitioner's filing of his complaint was untimely and did not state a Title VII claim in his state court complaint. To what extent does a court of law find plausibility to implicate reversible error upon res judicata and against a person's civil rights without due process and equal protections of the reservation and preservation upon both state and federal laws of established work-sharing agreements, this between such covenants upon a statute of limitations issue, when such agreements should be bridged, or to apply equitable tolling towards such agreements? Does an adjudicator's plain error to not exercise sound, reasonable, and legal decision-making