Jones v. Wal-Mart

Filing 37

JUDGMENT adopting Report and Recommendations re 33 Report and Recommendations; granting in part and denying in part 14 Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff's claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e, et seq; 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. 1981a; Discrimination in a place of public accommodation in violation of 42 U.S.C. 2000a; Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq. and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. 701 et seq. are DISM ISSED with prejudice. The matter will proceed to trial on plaintiff's claims under 42 U.S.C. 1981 (other than any claim under 42 U.S.C. 1981a) and 1982 and his claims related to the handling of his ethics complaint and his attempts to protest. FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall amend his complaint within 15 days of the entry of this judgment in accordance with this Order. Signed by Judge Tucker L Melancon on 2/2/2010. (crt,Keifer, K)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAKE CHARLES DIVISION EDDIE JAMES JONES V. WAL-MART CIVIL ACT. NO 2:09- cv-0044 JUDGE MELANÇON MAGISTRATE JUDGE HANNA JUDGMENT This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Patrick J. Hanna for Report and Recommendation. No objections have been filed. After an independent review of the record, the Court concludes that the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge is correct and therefore adopts the conclusions set forth therein. It is therefore ORDERED that defendant Wal-Mart's motion for partial dismissal is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff Eddie James Jones's claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et. seq.; § 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a; Discrimination in a place of public accommodation in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000a; Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et. seq., and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 701, et. seq., are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The matter will proceed to trial on plaintiff's claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 (other than any claim under 42

U.S.C. § 1981a) and 1982 and his claims related to the handling of his ethics complaint and his attempts to protest. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall amend his complaint WITHIN FIFTEEN DAYS of the entry of this judgment to allege his claims regarding the Ethics Complaint and his protest with more particularity. Through his amended complaint, plaintiff is to identify the basis in law (eg. federal or state statutory, constitutional, jurisprudential) upon which these claims are founded. Lafayette, Louisiana this 2nd day of February, 2010.