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

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

15-460 - Brown v. Education et al

Download Files


Document in Context
15-460 - Brown v. Education et al
March 11, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER. For the reasons discussed herein, the defendants' 20 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Motion to Dismiss is granted as to Counts Four and Five for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Motion to Dismiss is denied as to Counts Two, Three, and Three (A) because the Plaintiff has sufficiently pled nonconclusory factual allegations in his Amended Complaint. Counts One, Two, Three, and Three (A) of the Amended Complaint remain. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 3/11/2016. (Hillier, D.)
March 28, 2017
PDF | More
017. The parties shall file their joint trial memorandum within 90 days of this order in accordance with the instructions for such a memorandum (available on the undersigned's website). Should the parties wish to proceed to mediation, they shall jointly file a statement within 14 days, certifying that (1) counsel have conferred with their clients and each other, (2) the parties wish to proceed to mediation, (3) the parties are willing to participate in settlement efforts in good faith, and (4) counsel believe that a mediation stands at least a reasonable chance of resolving the case without trial. If they file such a statement, I will postpone the deadline for the filing of the joint trial memorandum until 45 days after the parties' mediation (but no later than 30 days before trial). Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 3/28/2017. (Howard, H.) Modified to correct formatting on 3/29/2017 (Shafer, J.).ORDER. For the reasons set forth in the attached, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Defendants' 39 motion for summary judgment. Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on Plaintiff's Title VII hostile work environment claim in Counts One and Two, his procedural due process claim in Count Three (A), and his retaliation claim under the First Amendment in Count Three. Plaintiff's retaliation claim under the Connecticut Constitution in Count Three is dismissed without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. ยง 1367(c)(1). The following claims remain: the Title VII discriminatory demotion claim in Counts One and Count Two, and the Title VII retaliation claim in Count Three. Jury selection is set for November 8, 2