Kennebrew v. Cobb County School District

Justia Dockets & Filings Eleventh Circuit Georgia Northern District Kennebrew v. Cobb County School District

Kennebrew v. Cobb County School District

Plaintiff:	Frank Kennebrew
Defendant:	Cobb County School District
Case Number:	1:2015cv02495
Filed:	July 13, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
Office:	Atlanta Office
County:	Fulton
Presiding Judge:	Catherine M Salinas
Presiding Judge:	Richard W. Story
Nature of Suit:	Employment
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 2000
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
April 18, 2016	Filing 25 ORDER: The 22 Report and Recommendation is received with approval and adopted as the Opinion and Order of this Court. The undersigned agrees with the observation by Judge Salinas that while Defendants argument that Plaintiff failed to establish an inference of race discrimination because two African-American applicants were hired may ultimately be persuasive, Plaintiffs Amended Complaint is sufficient to survive at the Motion to Dismiss stage. Defendants 6 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as mo ot. Defendants 11 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendants 11 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as to Plaintiffs Title VII race discrimination claim. Defendants 11 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs §§ 1981/1983 claim for race discrimination against the School District. Plaintiffs 14 Motion for Leave to Add a Paragraph is DENIED. The parties are ORDERED to file their Joint Preliminary Report and Discovery Plan within fourteen days. Signed by Judge Richard W. Story on 04/18/16. (sk)

Date Filed

Document Text

April 18, 2016

Filing 25 ORDER: The 22 Report and Recommendation is received with approval and adopted as the Opinion and Order of this Court. The undersigned agrees with the observation by Judge Salinas that while Defendants argument that Plaintiff failed to establish an inference of race discrimination because two African-American applicants were hired may ultimately be persuasive, Plaintiffs Amended Complaint is sufficient to survive at the Motion to Dismiss stage. Defendants 6 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as mo ot. Defendants 11 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendants 11 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as to Plaintiffs Title VII race discrimination claim. Defendants 11 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs §§ 1981/1983 claim for race discrimination against the School District. Plaintiffs 14 Motion for Leave to Add a Paragraph is DENIED. The parties are ORDERED to file their Joint Preliminary Report and Discovery Plan within fourteen days. Signed by Judge Richard W. Story on 04/18/16. (sk)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Georgia Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Kennebrew v. Cobb County School District
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Frank Kennebrew
Represented By:	Andrew Thelston Mosley, II
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Cobb County School District
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?