Opinion ID: 516086
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Summary Judgment of Claims for Defendants Baucus and Harper

Text: 29 She also appeals the court's grant of summary judgment for Baucus and Harper. We review de novo. 30 These claims mirror those against Williams. She also alleges that Baucus planned with church authorities to remove her as a candidate for church office. She claims that he failed to control his employee, Fitzgerald, and that Fitzgerald harassed her in her attempts to gain employment, stabilize her housing, and obtain adequate response to her needs. She alleges that Harper joined in this harassment. 31 Baucus was unaware of the matters alleged. His only contact with her occurred when members of his staff attempted to assist her. He never dealt with her directly. Nor has Harper ever taken any action affecting her employment or placement activities. 32 The court appropriately granted summary judgment. Rule 56(e) requires going beyond the pleadings and by affidavits (or by depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file) designating specific facts showing a genuine issue for trial. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 324, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 2553-2554, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986); Coverdell v. Dep't of Social & Health Services, 834 F.2d 758, 769 (9th Cir.1987). This Richards failed to do. 33 AFFIRMED.