Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

07-686 - Stokes v. The City of Montgomery et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
07-686 - Stokes v. The City of Montgomery et al
September 25, 2008
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER as follows: 1. The Plaintiff's 33 Partial Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in favor of Candida Stokes as to liability on the FMLA interference claim in Count III of the Amended Complaint and against the City of Montgomery. Damages for this claim will be determined at the trial of this case. 2. The Defendant's 35 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED only to the extent that Stokes has claimed in Count I of the Amended complaint that she suffers from an impairment which substantially limits a major life activity. The Motion is DENIED as to all other disability theories and claims in Count I, the gender claims in Count II, and the FMLA claims asserted against the City of Montgomery in Count III of the Amended Complaint. 3. The FMLA claims in Count III of the Amended Complaint against Bobby Bright and Art Baylor in their individual capacities are dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The case will proceed to trial against Defendants under the ADA and Rehabilitation Act for disparate treatment, disparate impact, failure to accomodate, and retaliation in Count I of the Amended Complaint, brought by the Plaintiff on the theories that she was regarded as disabled or had a record of disability; the claims in Count II for gender discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII; and against the City of Montgomery only on the FMLA retaliation claim and the issue of damages for the FMLA interference claim in Count III of the Amended Complaint. Signed by Honorable W. Harold Albritton, III on 9/25/2008. (Attachments: #(1) Civil Appeals Checklist)(dmn)