Lack of clear communication with self-represented worker revives case

A trial court failed to provide clear and understandable instructions about the deadline for filing an amended complaint to a college professor who was acting as his own attorney in a race and sexual orientation discrimination and retaliation case against his employer. According to the court of appeal, when the employee didn't file his amended complaint by the deadline, the court wrongfully dismissed his case.

College professor sues for discrimination, harassment, retaliation

Anthony Nuno, an assistant professor at California State University, Bakersfield (CSU), applied for a promotion to full professor. When his application was denied, he complained to CSU about harassment, retaliation, exclusion, and homophobic behavior in the workplace, including allegations that he was prohibited from attending department meetings and from directly communicating by e-mail with other professors in the department. He alleged that his exclusion from meetings and the prohibition on communicating with coworkers was retaliation for his report of harassment, discrimination and retaliation at CSU.

Nuno filed harassment, retaliation, and discrimination charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The EEOC dismissed the charges and issued Nuno a notice of his right to file a lawsuit against CSU. He then sued the university for discrimination and retaliation in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA).

Trial court proceedings