Kelly v. Ironwood Communications, Inc.

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit Oregon District Court Kelly v. Ironwood Communications, Inc.

Kelly v. Ironwood Communications, Inc.

Plaintiff:	James Kelly
Defendant:	Ironwood Communications, Inc.
Case Number:	1:2008cv03058
Filed:	May 28, 2008
Court:	US District Court for the District of Oregon
Office:	Medford Office
Presiding Judge:	Owen M. Panner
Nature of Suit:	Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Jury Demanded By:	None

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
October 29, 2009	Filing 92 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The Court finds that Defendant Ironwood did not discriminate or retaliate against Plaintiff Kelly in violation of ORS § 659A.040. Plaintiff's invocation of the workers' compensation system was neither a substantial factor nor did it make a difference in Ironwood's decision to terminate the temporary modified quality control position and to reinstate Plaintiff. The Court directs that Judgment be entered for Plaintiff. Please access entire text by document number hyperlink. Ordered and Signed on 10/29/2009 by Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke. (rsm)
April 30, 2009	Filing 54 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment 26 . Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 26 on the issue of violation of Plaintiff's reemployment rights is granted. Plaintiff has not shown that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether there were suitable, available positions. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on the issue of retaliation against Plaintiff for filing a WC claim is denied. Plaintiff has made a prima facie case for retaliation, and he has presente d enough evidence that a reasonable jury could determine that Plaintiff's protected activity of filing a WC claim was a motivating factor in Defendant's adverse employment decision. Please access entire text by document number hyperlink. Signed on 04/30/2009 by Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke. (rsm)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 29, 2009

Filing 92 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The Court finds that Defendant Ironwood did not discriminate or retaliate against Plaintiff Kelly in violation of ORS § 659A.040. Plaintiff's invocation of the workers' compensation system was neither a substantial factor nor did it make a difference in Ironwood's decision to terminate the temporary modified quality control position and to reinstate Plaintiff. The Court directs that Judgment be entered for Plaintiff. Please access entire text by document number hyperlink. Ordered and Signed on 10/29/2009 by Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke. (rsm)

April 30, 2009

Filing 54 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment 26 . Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 26 on the issue of violation of Plaintiff's reemployment rights is granted. Plaintiff has not shown that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether there were suitable, available positions. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on the issue of retaliation against Plaintiff for filing a WC claim is denied. Plaintiff has made a prima facie case for retaliation, and he has presente d enough evidence that a reasonable jury could determine that Plaintiff's protected activity of filing a WC claim was a motivating factor in Defendant's adverse employment decision. Please access entire text by document number hyperlink. Signed on 04/30/2009 by Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke. (rsm)

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 Oregon District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Kelly v. Ironwood Communications, Inc.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Ironwood Communications, Inc.
Represented By:	Leigh Ann Collings Tift
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 ]
Plaintiff: James Kelly
Represented By:	Carl Lee Post
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?