Crowley v. Napolitano
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|March 31, 2015
OPINION AND ORDER re: 42 MOTION for Summary Judgment. filed by Janet A. Napolitano. Although this Court is hesitant to grant summary judgment in Title VII cases, recognizing that it must do so sparingly, here it is compelled to do so. The Co urt does not doubt the sincerity of Plaintiff's belief that she was unfairly treated. Indeed, there is no disagreement here that Plaintiff worked for an organization where those creating the work schedules--the WCD OPS team-- were afforded si gnificant discretion. With such discretion comes the risk of favoritism, including favoritism in the way schedules are assigned. Even accepting that there was such favoritism, however, for the reasons the Court has attempted to explain, what is mis sing in this record is any evidence that any alleged favoritism resulted in material disparities that manifested along gender lines. In other words, Plaintiff has failed to adduce sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case of discrimina tion and retaliation under Title VII. Accordingly, Defendant's motion for summary judgment must be GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion pending at Dkt. 42, and to close this case. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 3/31/2015) (lmb)
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 New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?