Bibbs v. New River Community and Technical College et al
| Richard L. Bibbs |
| Leah A. Taylor, Ted D. Spring and New River Community and Technical College |
| 5:2011cv00519 |
| April 23, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia |
| Beckley Office |
| Fayette |
| Irene C. Berger |
| R. Clarke VanDervort |
| Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 |
| Plaintiff |
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
156
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court ORDERS that the Plaintiff's 155 Objections to the Magistrate Judge's 151 Findings and Recommendation are SUSTAINED IN PART AND OVERRULED IN PART; the Court ORDERS that the Defendants' 115 MOTION for Summary Judgment be GRANTED with respect to the race discrimination claim for the two Administrative Secretary Positions; to the extent the Plaintiff objects to summary judgment with respect to the remaining positions to which he applied, his objections are OVERRULED and the Court ORDERS that summary judgment be GRANTED to the Defendants with respect to any positions not discussed in this Memorandum Opinion and Order; the Court ORDERS that the Fourteenth Amendment claim that the Plai ntiff is "no longer pursuing" be DISMISSED; the Court ORDERS that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment be DENIED with respect to the Plaintiff's Title VII and Section 1981 gender discrimination claims for the eight positions li sted herein; the Court ORDERS that the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment be DENIED with respect to the Plaintiff's Title VII and Section 1981 race-based discrimination claims for the positions listed herein, with the exception of the two Administrative Secretary postings; the Court ORDERS that the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment be DENIED with respect to the Plaintiff's claim of retaliation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2000e-3(a); the Plaintiff's retaliation claim may go forward with respect to all positions for which his application was considered after Leah Taylor became aware of his EEOC complaint, as more fully described herein. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 12/2/2013. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (slr)
|
|
Filing
140
ORDER: The Court ADOPTS and incorporates the findings of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the 127 Order; the Court ORDERS that the Plaintiff's 129 Objections to the Court's 4-12-13 Order (Doc. 127) be OVERRULED. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 6/24/2013. (cc: Magistrate Judge VanDervort; attys; any unrepresented party) (slr)
|
|
Filing
110
ORDER: It is ORDERED that Plaintiff's 95 MOTION for Sanctions is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort on 12/6/2012. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (slr)
|
|
Filing
54
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: denying Plaintiff's 32 MOTION to Compel Disclosure of Discovery Requests; denying Defendants' 37 MOTION for Protective Order; denying Plaintiff's 40 MOTION for Protective Order; Plaintiff is directed to respond to the specified interrogatories by 10/12/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort on 9/12/2012. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (slr)
|
|
Filing
27
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING PROPOSED FINDING AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the 20 Proposed Findings and Recommendation. The Court OR DERS that the Defendants New River Community and Technical College, President Ted D. Spring and Human Resource Director Leah A. Taylor's 10 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint be DENIED. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 7/19/2012. (cc: USMJ VanDervort; attys; any unrepresented party) (msa)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- 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.
