Ripple v. Olympic Steel

Ripple v. Olympic Steel

Plaintiff:	Wayne Ripple
Defendant:	Olympic Steel
Case Number:	1:2012cv02234
Filed:	November 8, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Office:	Harrisburg Office
County:	Huntingdon
Presiding Judge:	Thomas M. Blewitt
Presiding Judge:	John E. Jones
Nature of Suit:	Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
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
February 10, 2014	Filing 54 ORDER: 1. The magistrates report 45 is REJECTED in part and ADOPTEDin part.2. The portion of the magistrates report that recommends summary judgment 32 be granted in favor of Dfts on the ADA claim (Count I) and the PHRA claim (Count IV) is ADOPTE D. Summary judgment is granted in favor of Dfts on Counts I and IV. 3. The portion of the magistrates report that recommends summary judgment be granted in favor of Dfts on the constructive discharge claim (Count II) is REJECTED. 4. The portion of th e report that recommends we decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the intentional infliction of emotional distress claim (Count III) is ADOPTED. 5. Pltfs state law claims (Counts II and III) are dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. 6. The Clerk of Court shall close this case. Signed by Honorable William W. Caldwell on 02/10/14 (ma)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 10, 2014

Filing 54 ORDER: 1. The magistrates report 45 is REJECTED in part and ADOPTEDin part.2. The portion of the magistrates report that recommends summary judgment 32 be granted in favor of Dfts on the ADA claim (Count I) and the PHRA claim (Count IV) is ADOPTE D. Summary judgment is granted in favor of Dfts on Counts I and IV. 3. The portion of the magistrates report that recommends summary judgment be granted in favor of Dfts on the constructive discharge claim (Count II) is REJECTED. 4. The portion of th e report that recommends we decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the intentional infliction of emotional distress claim (Count III) is ADOPTED. 5. Pltfs state law claims (Counts II and III) are dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. 6. The Clerk of Court shall close this case. Signed by Honorable William W. Caldwell on 02/10/14 (ma)

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 Pennsylvania Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ripple v. Olympic Steel
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Olympic Steel
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: Wayne Ripple
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?