Filed 11/2/22 Brinkley v. Cal. State U., Northridge CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE NATALIE E. BRINKLEY, B296983 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. SC123205) v. CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE et al, Defendants and Respondents. Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Craig D. Karlan, Judge. Affirmed. Michael H. Lapidus for Plaintiff and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Danielle F. O’Bannon, Assistant Attorney General, Elizabeth S. Angres and Haiyang Allen Li, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendants and Respondents. ____________________ The incidents that triggered this litigation arose nearly nine years ago during plaintiff Natalie Brinkley’s first semester as a student at defendant California State University, Northridge (CSUN). A few hours before the midnight deadline, she emailed her professor an equivocal request for an extension of time to submit the first three-page essay required in a social science class. Her professor ultimately refused the request, citing her general policy to deny extensions requested close to the deadline. Brinkley, who was receiving special assistance and accommodations from CSUN due to her learning disabilities, thereafter accused the professor of being “unethical”; advised the professor that she had “sent a request to civil rights for help”; subsequently expressed in an email to her counselor in the Disability Resources and Education Services Center (DRES) that the professor was being a “bitch,” and ultimately made a police report for what she described as harassment by CSUN as it responded to these circumstances. The essay-deadline incident and CSUN’s response to her complaints allegedly triggered a cascading series of adverse health events that culminated in Brinkley’s withdrawal from the university for medical reasons. In September 2014, Brinkley filed a complaint in propria persona against CSUN and five individual employees1 1 The individuals named in her complaint are Mark Smith, a counselor with DRES; Jennifer Thompson, the professor; Sam Lingrosso, director of student conduct and ethical development; Jody Johnson, director of DRES; and Jody Myers, coordinator of the Jewish studies interdisciplinary program. The class for which Brinkley has sought the extension was Jewish Ethics and Society, which was taught by Thompson and within Myers’ program. 2 (collectively, Defendants), alleging claims for relief for, inter alia, violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA; 42 USC §§ 12131-12132), the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act; 29 USC §§ 701-796), the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Unruh Act; Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1-52), as well as for negligence, negligent misrepresentations, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Brinkley later retained counsel, and the litigation proceeded until the court granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment in October 2018. That motion had been filed on …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals