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

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

14-30216 - O'Rourke v. Hampshire Council of Governments et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
14-30216 - O'Rourke v. Hampshire Council of Governments et al
August 7, 2015
PDF | More
t is So Ordered. See the attached memo and order for complete details. (Lindsay, Maurice)Judge Mark G. Mastroianni: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered. As follows: For the reasons stated, the court DENIES Defendants motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 15) with respect to Plaintiffs 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim (Count I), Plaintiffs Conspiracy to Violate 42 U.S.C. U.S.C. § 1983 (Count IV), and Plaintiffs breach of contract claim (Count II). Assuming Plaintiff has not conceded his Open Meeting Law claim (Count III), the court ALLOWS Defendants motion to dismiss this claim without prejudice. I
September 23, 2016
PDF | More
Magistrate Judge Katherine A. Robertson: ORDER entered. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 39 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Todd D. Ford, Michael P. Sarsynski, Jr., George A. Symborski, Eileen Stewart, William R. Barnett, Carol P. Constant, Hampshire Council of Governments, 36 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by John P. O'Rourke. Recommendation: Although Plaintiff had an implied employment contract pursuant to the law of the case, the undersigned recommends that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment - 36) be DENIED, and Defendants' Cross Motion for Summary Judgment - 39 - be DENIED because there is a genuine factual dispute about whether the purported reorganization of the Electricity Department was legitimate or was a pretext for Plaintiff's unlawful termination. Objections to R&R due by 10/7/2016(Finn, Mary)
March 29, 2017
PDF | More
Judge Mark G. Mastroianni: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered. As follows: For the reasons stated, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 68) is hereby ADOPTED in its entirety. Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgement (Dkt. No. 36) and Defendants Cross Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 39) are DENIED. It is So Ordered. See the attached memo and order for complete details. (Lindsay, Maurice)