In Re Arno P. Kuigoua

Given that Petitioner has provided evidence supporting six claims of discrimination, retaliation and wrongful termination in violation of the Fair Employment Housing Act, Labor Code, Health and Safety Code, and Whistleblower Protection Act, and since it has been long held that evidence, upon motion for summary judgment, should be viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmovant, THE QUESTION PRESENTED HERE IS: Whether in a case like this one, where the petitioner was denied on appeal his motion to remand his civil suit for jury trial, claiming six counts of discrimination and retaliation, and where his appeal was denied on the grounds that relief was unavailable pursuant to California Code Civ. Proc., § 437 and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 56, is it error for the court to deny his appeal from summary judgment when the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to him, indicates genuine issues of fact exist on each claim?