Richard v. St Tammany Parish Sheriff Department

Filing 142

ORDER AND REASONS - IT IS ORDERED that 136 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is DENIED, as set forth herein. Signed by Judge Martin L.C. Feldman on 7/21/2021. (sa)

Case 2:17-cv-09703-MLCF-JVM Document 142 Filed 07/21/21 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
MARK RICHARD

CIVIL ACTION

v.

NO. 17-9703

ST. TAMMANY PARISH SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

SECTION “F”

ORDER AND REASONS
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but facts are stubborn
things.

In

2019,

“numerous

genuine

the

plaintiff

issues”

of

claimed

fact

to

regarding

have
his

established
“retaliation

claims” in opposing the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
See Pl.’s Opp’n to Def.’s Second Mot. for Summ. J. at 24.

Now,

with a jury trial fast approaching, he insists that despite what
he argued before, there is in fact “no genuine issue of material
fact regarding his retaliatory discharge from employment” with the
defendant sheriff’s department.

See Mot. at 1 (emphasis added).

Thus, he now claims, there is no longer a need for trial; the
summary

judgment

record

conclusively

establishes

that

the

defendant had no legitimate reason for the alleged retaliatory
discharge at issue.
leave

open

the

The defendants respond that the record does

question

of

whether

their

asserted

terminating the plaintiff is genuine or pretentious.
1

basis

for

Case 2:17-cv-09703-MLCF-JVM Document 142 Filed 07/21/21 Page 2 of 2

Notwithstanding

the

plaintiff’s

about-face,

an

objective

review of the record confirms that what was true in 2019 remains
true today: namely, that significant questions of fact turning
largely on witness credibility make summary judgment “patently
inappropriate.”

See Richard v. St. Tammany Par. Sheriff’s Dep’t,

2019 WL 1670743, at *14 (E.D. La. Apr. 17, 2019).
New Orleans, Louisiana, July 21, 2021

_____________________________
MARTIN L. C. FELDMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2