WILLIAMS v. LOWE'S OF EAST LANCASTER #2687 et al

Filing 32

ORDER THAT DEFENDANT CAMPBELL'S MOTION FOR JOINDER ARE GRANTS. THE MOTIONS TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT ARE DENIED AS TO PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS FOR DISCRIMINATORY DISCHARGE. THE MOTIONS TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT ARE GRANTED AS TO ALL OTHER CLAIMS CONTAINED IN THE COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE. DEFENDANTS WENDORFF, ALBERTSON, AND CAMPBELL ARE DISMISSED AS PARTIES TO THIS ACTION. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LAWRENCE F. STENGEL ON 12/5/2012. 12/6/2012 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(sg, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA DELORES WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. KERRY COLLINS, et al., Defendants. : : : : : : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 12-1149 ORDER AND NOW, this 5th day of December 2012, upon consideration of the Motions to Dismiss of Defendant Lowe’s (Doc. No. 20) and Defendants Albertson, Collins, Soslow, and Wendorff (Doc. No. 9) (collectively, “the Motions to Dismiss”), Plaintiff’s Responses thereto (Doc. Nos. 17 and 25), and Defendant Campbell’s Motions for Joinder (Doc. Nos. 14 and 23), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Defendant Campbell’s Motions for Joinder are GRANTED; 2. The Motions to Dismiss the Complaint are DENIED as to Plaintiff’s claims for discriminatory discharge under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 against Defendants Collins, Soslow, and Lowe’s contained in Count I; Plaintiff’s claim for race-based discriminatory discharge under Title VII and the PHRA against Defendant Lowe’s contained in Count II; and Plaintiff’s claim for retaliation under Title VII and the PHRA against Defendant Lowe’s contained in Count II; 3. The Motions to Dismiss the Complaint are GRANTED as to all other claims contained in the Complaint, with prejudice; and 4. Defendants Wendorff, Albertson, and Campbell are DISMISSED as parties to this action. BY THE COURT: /s/ Lawrence F. Stengel LAWRENCE F. STENGEL, J.

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?