SPEED v. WES HEALTH SYSTEM et al
MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GERALD A. MCHUGH ON 12/21/15. 12/21/15 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(mbh, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
WES HEALTH SYSTEM,
This 21st day of December, 2015, upon consideration of Defendant’s Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56, Plaintiff’s Opposition thereto, and following
the Court’s comprehensive review of all supporting papers and exhibits, including but not limited
to: Plaintiff’s deposition transcript; an excerpt from Defendant’s Employee Handbook;
correspondence from Defendant’s Senior Human Resources Manager, Sharon Mackin,
explaining the decision to discharge Plaintiff; Plaintiff’s Written Statement dated April 12, 2013;
and select portions from the deposition transcripts of Rashida Bradley, Kevin Wimberly, and
Sharon Mackin, I find that there are genuine disputes as to material facts that would allow a
reasonable juror to rule in Plaintiff’s favor, thereby precluding judgment as a matter of law. See
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986) (“Summary judgment will not lie if
the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury
could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.”).
“[A]t the summary judgment stage the judge's function is not himself to weigh the
evidence and determine the truth of the matter but to determine whether there is a genuine issue
for trial.” Id. at 249; Big Apple BMW, Inc. v. BMW of N. Am., Inc., 974 F.2d 1358, 1362–63 (3d
Cir. 1992). “Credibility determinations, the weighing of the evidence, and the drawing of
legitimate inferences from the facts are jury functions . . . The evidence of the non-movant is to
be believed, and all justifiable inferences are to be drawn in his favor.” Anderson, 477 U.S. at
255. Thus, at this juncture, it is appropriate for a jury to assess the credibility of the parties and
their witnesses and weigh the evidence accordingly.
Based on the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment is DENIED.
/s/ Gerald Austin McHugh
United States District Court 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?