Frazier v. Colonial Bank et al (MAG+)
OPINION. Signed by Honorable Myron H. Thompson on 3/7/2011. (wcl, )
-WC Frazier v. Colonial Bank et al (MAG+)
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
DAWN FRAZIER, Plaintiff, v. COLONIAL BANK, et al., Defendants.
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) OPINION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:10cv287-MHT (WO)
Plaintiff Dawn Frazier filed this lawsuit against defendants Colonial Bank, Branch Banking and Trust
Company (also known as BB&T), and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (also known as FDIC), as receiver for Colonial of Bank. Colonial Frazier Bank, claims she that, while an to
retaliation, a hostile-work environment, race and gender discrimination, and maternity-leave discrimination, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§ 1981a, 2000e to 2000e-17), and the Family and Medical Leave Act (29 U.S.C. §§ 2601-
This matter is now before the court on the
recommendation of the magistrate judge that the FDIC's motion to substitute party should be granted; BB&T's motions to dismiss denied as moot; the FDIC's motion to dismiss granted; and this case dismissed in its entirety for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. filed objections to the recommendation. Frazier has After an
independent and de novo review of the record, the court concludes that Frazier's objections should be overruled and the magistrate judge's recommendation adopted. An appropriate judgment will be entered. DONE, this the 7th day of March, 2011.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?