Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

GALLOWAY v. UPS

November 20, 1984

ROBERT GALLOWAY, JR., Plaintiff
v.
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., Defendant


William W. Caldwell, United States District Judge.


The opinion of the court was delivered by: CALDWELL

WILLIAM W. CALDWELL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 I. Introduction

 Before the court is defendant's motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. For the reasons contained herein, the motion is granted.

 II. Background

 The uncontroverted facts in this case indicate that Robert Galloway, Jr., the plaintiff, was employed by defendant United Parcel Service (UPS) at its Harrisburg facility from August, 1973, to October, 1980, at which time plaintiff was discharged. Defendant has maintained that plaintiff's discharge was grounded in his arrest on May 31, 1980, on various charges that ultimately resulted in his plea of guilty on October 29, 1980, to loitering, prowling, and resisting arrest. Plaintiff was suspended from employment between June 4 and June 17, 1980, and after he was sentenced to six to twenty months in prison to commence immediately upon his guilty plea, he was discharged on October 31, 1980.

 The current action was filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000e-5, et seq., and plaintiff alleges that he was discharged from his employment with UPS on the basis of his race. Galloway contends that defendant UPS treated another employee differently because of race and avers that while that employee was incarcerated, he was on work release and worked at the defendant's facility.

 Depositions have been taken of plaintiff Galloway and three UPS supervisors, Robert C. Allison, Willie James Kelly and Dannie William DeBiase. In addition, UPS has answered written interrogatories and a request for the production of documents.

 III. The Summary Judgment Motion

 The standard for granting summary judgment is contained in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c), which provides in pertinent part:

 
The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.

 In ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the court's duty is to view facts contained in the moving party's materials in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion. See, e.g., Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 158-59, 90 S. Ct. 1598, 1609, 26 L. Ed. 2d 142, 155 (1970).

 In discrimination cases, summary judgment for defendants is seldom granted.

 
Courts are reluctant to dismiss by summary judgment Title VII discrimination suits where, as in antitrust actions, motive and intent are crucial elements and the proof ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.