Amara v. ATK INC et al
| Amara S Ayman |
| ATK INC, Robert Henderson, Dennis Walstrum and Brain Barber |
| 3:2008cv00378 |
| October 17, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other Office |
| MONTGOMERY |
| Sharon L Ovington |
| Walter H Rice |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 29:2617 Family and Medical Leave Act |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
23
DECISION AND ENTRY - It is therefore ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendations filed on August 5, 2009 (Doc. 22 ) is ADOPTED in full; 2.Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 4 ) is GRANTED. By agreement of the parties the following claims are DISMISSED with prejudice: a. Plaintiff's claim for age discrimination in its entirety. b. All of the Ohio public policy claims pled by Plaintiff except for Plaintiff's Ohio public policy claim for workers' compensation for retaliat ion. c. All claims against the individual Defendants predicated on Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and those based on Ohio Revised Code Annotated § 4123.90, or common law public policy th at creates a cause of actions for retaliation for participation in Ohio's workers' compensation scheme. d. Plaintiff's claim against any or all of the Defendants based on Ohio's criminal falsification statute, Ohio Revised Code An notated § 2921.13.2. The Ohio common law public policy claim for workers' compensation retaliation are DISMISSED with prejudice, and 3. Claims against Defendants Henderson, Comer, Barber, and Walstrum under Ohio Revised Code § 4112.02 are DISMISSED without prejudice to Plaintiff filing an Amended Complaint on or before September 14, 2009. Signed by Judge Walter H Rice on 8/26/09. (cib1)
|
|
Filing
22
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 4 - IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT:1. Defendants Motion to Dismiss 4 should be GRANTED. By agreementof the parties the following claims should be dismissed with prejudice: a. Plaintiffs claim for age discrimination in its entirety.b. All of the Ohio public policy claims pled by Plaintiff except forPlaintiffs Ohio public policy claim for workers compensation retaliation. c. All claims against the individual Defendants predicated on Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and those based on Ohio Revised Code Annotated § 4123.90, or common law public policy that creates a cause of actions for retaliation for participation in Ohios workers compensation sc heme. d. Plaintiffs claim against any or all of the Defendants based on Ohios criminal falsification statute, Ohio Revised Code Annotated § 2921.13. 2. The Ohio common law public policy claim for workers compensation retaliation be DISMISSED wit h prejudice, and 3. Claims against Defendants Henderson, Comer, Barber, and Walstrum underOhio Revised Code § 4112.02 be DISMISSED without prejudice to Plaintiff filingan Amended Complaint. Objections to R&R due by 8/24/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sharon L Ovington on 8/5/2009. (davisj1, )
|
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 Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
