Chuang v. University of California Davis
| Decision Date | 14 March 2000 |
| Docket Number | No. 99-15036,FITZ-ROY,99-15036 |
| Citation | 225 F.3d 1115 |
| Parties | (9th Cir. 2000) RONALD Y. CHUANG and LINDA CHUANG, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS, BOARD OF TRUSTEES; andCURRY, Defendants-Appellees |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
COUNSEL: Bradley G. Booth, Booth & Finch, Sacramento, California, for the plaintiffs-appellants.
Dennis C. Huie, Porter, Scott, Weiberg & Delehant, Sacramento, California, for the defendants-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California David F. Levi, District Judge, Presiding D.C. No. CV-97-00613 DFL/PAN
Before: Henry A. Politz,1 Stephen Reinhardt, Michael Daly Hawkins, Circuit Judges.
Dr. Ronald Y. Chuang and Dr. Linda Chuang contend that officials at the University of California, Davis ("Davis") discriminated against them on the basis of their race (Asian) and national origin (Chinese), in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. S 2000e et seq.2 The Chuangs allege that they suffered discrimination as a result of: (1) Davis's failure and refusal to provide Dr. Ronald Chuang with a promised tenure position; (2) Davis's forcible relocation of the Chuangs' laboratory during an ongoing research program sponsored by the National Institute of Health ("NIH"); and (3) Davis's failure to respond to Dr. Ronald Chuang's complaints regarding the misappropriation of some of his research funds. The district court granted Davis summary judgment on all three claims. We reverse on the first two and remand for further proceedings.
Dr. Ronald Chuang is a microbiologist with a worldwide reputation in his area of expertise. He has conducted important research on the interaction between drug abuse and AIDS, including a seminal study on the effect of morphine on the simian immunodeficiency virus, an important model for AIDS research. He has published his findings in prestigious scientific journals. His research has been continuously supported by grants from the National Institute of Health (NIH). In 1996, when many of the events in this case transpired, his research program was being funded by an extraordinary $1.7 million grant from the NIH and other external sources.
The School of Medicine at Davis is divided into two parts: Clinical and Basic Sciences. The Basic Sciences division consists of five departments: pharmacology, biological chemistry, physiology, cell biology and human anatomy, and medical microbiology.
In 1982, the School of Medicine hired Dr. Chuang as an assistant professor of pharmacology and Dr. Linda Chuang, his wife, as an assistant research pharmacologist. 4 The Chuangs have long collaborated on various research programs. The Chuangs joined the pharmacology department at Davis because they had enjoyed their graduate school experience there and wanted to contribute to the university's educational mission. In choosing Davis, Dr. Chuang turned down an offer for a tenure-track position at the leading pharmacology department in the country, at Yale University.
When Dr. Chuang joined Davis, he was appointed as an assistant "in-residence" professor. Professors in residence are responsible for funding most of their salaries and research through outside grants. By contrast, full-time-equivalent (FTE) professors -i.e., tenured faculty -have their salaries funded directly by Davis. When an FTE faculty member in a department retires or resigns, the FTE position is generally returned to the department to be reallocated to someone else. Dr. Chuang, the only full-time faculty member in the pharmacology department who is not Caucasian, is also the only one without an FTE.
Shortly after Dr. Chuang joined the department, Dr. Larry Stark, then the department chairman, supported Dr. Chuang for a five-year NIH Research Career Development Award (RCDA), with the understanding that if the prestigious award were granted, Dr. Chuang would receive an FTE position upon its completion. Dr. Chuang received the award, completed it in 1989, but never received an FTE.
In a letter dated April 26, 1988, Chairman Stark informed Dr. Chuang that School of Medicine Dean Hibbard Williams wanted to keep him on the faculty, but that no FTE was available at the time and Davis could not provide him one until a resignation or retirement occurred. In a memorandum dated April 1988, Chairman Stark told an assistant dean that "the School has committed itself to finding [Dr. Chuang] a permanent FTE position in the Department." The memorandum described Dr. Chuang's promotions within the department to the level of associate professor and concluded that in light of "recent court decisions . . . these facts also argue strongly for planning an FTE position for Dr. Chuang."
There have been five retirements in the pharmacology department since 1989. Nevertheless, Dr. Chuang has not received an FTE.
The Executive Committee is a supervisory and policymaking body of the Davis School of Medicine. At a meeting of this committee in 1989, Professor Wallace Winters asked about a Chinese-American professor (not Dr. Chuang) whom the faculty of the pharmacology department had previously and unanimously asked the administration to pursue as a candidate for department chairman. The administration had never contacted this candidate, and Dean Williams had not responded to the faculty's request. According to Professor Winters, Dr. Carroll Cross, sitting next to the dean, remarked that "two Chinks" in the department were more than enough; in response, Dean Williams laughed.
In 1989 and 1990, Davis hired two Caucasian professors as FTEs in the pharmacology department. The second of these two professors, Dr. Michael Hanley, a male Caucasian with no active NIH grants, was hired as a "Targets of Opportunity for Diversity" appointment. The "Targets of Opportunity for Diversity" program was designed by the University of California to recruit minority and women faculty. It provided a special exemption by which a department could forgo the regular full candidate search for an open position.5 Through these hires, the already overwhelmingly white pharmacology department became more so.
Several more FTEs became available to Dean Williams, but he never used them. Two and a half FTE positions were available in the pharmacology department due to retirements. When Dean Gerald Lazarus took over in 1992, he gave three FTEs to the new Rowe Program (described infra ); four FTEs to the Basic Sciences division for recruitment purposes; and two FTEs to the Basic Sciences division for "compelling educational needs, retention or requirements of the Associate Dean for Research" (emphasis added). None of these FTEs went to Dr. Chuang, despite the earlier assurances he had received.
After the Chuangs filed their complaint in district court in 1997, the Basic Sciences division filled a number of FTE positions. Three were given to Asian professors, but not to Dr. Chuang.
When the Chuangs joined the faculty in 1982, they were assigned laboratory space in Tupper Hall for their exclusive use. Dr. Gary Henderson, a Caucasian faculty member, refused to remove equipment and materials that he was storing there. In spite of the requests of the Chuangs and the department chairman, Dr. Henderson did not remove the equipment and materials until approximately seven years later. He was not forcibly relocated.
In 1990, when the department made its "diversity"-based hire of Dr. Hanley, Dean Williams asked the Chuangs to give Dr. Hanley two laboratory rooms that they were using for ongoing research. At the time, most of the other faculty members were using their laboratory space for storage purposes; Dr. Chuang was the only faculty member in the pharmacology department conducting active research. Although Dean Williams assured the Chuangs that this arrangement would be temporary, lasting approximately 13-18 months, the rooms were never returned. The Chuangs had to borrow laboratories from other faculty members to continue their research. They relocated their equipment and research in borrowed spaces five times.
Upon becoming dean of the School of Medicine, Dr. Lazarus decided to launch the "Rowe Program," a program in human genetics. The program required 5000 square feet of space. Davis officials initially designated space in Briggs Hall for this program. They contend, however, that Dr. Michael Seldin, the professor who was to be hired as the Rowe Chair, conditioned his acceptance on receiving the space adjacent to the department of biological sciences on the fourth floor of Tupper Hall -the space occupied by the pharmacology department. In his deposition, Dr. Seldin denied that he had demanded this space.
In open meetings in December 1995, Associate Dean FitzRoy Curry assured the Basic Sciences division faculty that no faculty member with an active research program would be affected by the allocation of space for the Rowe Program. Then, on January 29, 1996, Dr. Mannfred Hollinger, the new chairman of the pharmacology department, informed the Chuangs that the department would be moved from the fourth floor to the basement of Tupper Hall. If the Chuangs refused to move out, Hollinger said, the administration would change the locks on their doors. Dr. Tom Jue, a faculty member in the biological chemistry department who had borrowed laboratory space in the pharmacology department, was also told to relocate. Like the Chuangs, Dr. Jue was Chinese-American and had an active research program funded by the NIH. Most of the other pharmacology laboratory rooms on the fourth floor were not in use; they were reserved for "future pharmacologists" or new faculty members not yet identified.6 The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Zamora v. Sec. Indus. Specialists, Inc.
...intent to move past summary judgment.’ " ( Morgan , at pp. 68-69, 105 Cal.Rptr.2d 652, fn.omitted, quoting Chuang v. University of California Davis (9th Cir. 2000) 225 F.3d 1115, 1128.)California courts examined the use of direct evidence in cases involving disability discrimination in Glyn......
-
Martinez v. Costco Wholesale Corp., Case No.: 19CV1195-GPC(WVG)
...action "materially affect[s] the compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of ... employment." Chuang v. Univ. of California Davis, Bd. of Trustees , 225 F.3d 1115, 1126 (9th Cir. 2000). Adverse employment actions include "assigning more, or more burdensome, work responsibilities" as w......
-
Bowen v. M. Caratan, Inc.
...not persuasion. Hawn v. Executive Jet Mgmt., Inc., 615 F.3d 1151, 1155 (9th Cir.2010) (quoting Chuang v. Univ. of Cal. Davis, Bd. of Trs., 225 F.3d 1115, 1123–24 (9th Cir.2000) ). To rebut the presumption created by a prima facie case, a defendant must raise a genuine issue of fact as to wh......
-
Gathenji v. Autozoners LLC
...favorable to the plaintiff and must resolve factual disputes in favor of the non-moving party. Chuang v. University of California Davis, Bd. of Trustees, 225 F.3d 1115, 1124 (9th Cir.2000). Based on the evidence presented, Mr. Gathenji establishes that others not in his protected class were......
-
Race and national origin discrimination
...“Asian” employees does not answer Title VII claim of discrimination based on national origin. Chuang v. University of California Davis , 225 F.3d 1115, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000). References: Identification of job seeker by race in “situation wanted” employment advertising as violation of state c......
-
Deposing & examining the plaintiff
...action, and (4) was treated less favorably than other employees similarly situated. See Chuang v. Univ. of Cal. Davis, Bd. of Trustees, 225 F.3d 1115, 1123 (9th Cir. 2000) (citing McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 802, 93 S.Ct. 1817). Finally, “[t]he requisite degree of proof necessary to esta......
-
Summary Judgment Practice and Procedure
...termination or even a decrease in benefits or pay.”) (citation omitted); Chuang v. University of California Davis, Bd. of Trustees , 225 F.3d 1115, 1126 (9th Cir. 2000) (“The removal of or substantial interference with work facilities important to the performance of the job constitutes a ma......
-
The implications of psychological research related to unconscious discrimination and implicit bias in proving intentional discrimination.
...F.3d 605, 610 (6th Cir. 2002); Graham v. Long Island R.R., 230 F.3d 34, 38-39 (2d Cir. 2000); Chuang v. Univ. of Cal. Davis, Bd. of Trs., 225 F.3d 1115, 1123 (9th Cir. (39.) This is true because a reasonable jury could infer discrimination from such evidence alone. See, e.g., Graham v. Long......