Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Lennex v. Wal-Mart Stores East

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA


March 19, 2008

JOHN LENNEX, PLAINTIFF,
v.
WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Joy Flowers Conti

Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Plaintiff's Complaint was received by the Clerk of Court and was subsequently referred to United States Magistrate Judge Lisa Lenihan for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrate Judges.

This case involves claims related to the alleged failure of defendant Wal-Mart Stores East, LP ("Defendant") to accommodate, and discriminatory and/or retaliatory treatment and termination of plaintiff, John Lennex ("Lennex"), in response to Lennex's request for accommodation of disability resulting from his coronary condition, in violation of Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. 12112 et seq. (the "ADA") and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, 43 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 955(a) et seq. (the "PHRA"). The Magistrate Judge's February 29, 2008 Report and Recommendation recommended that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment be denied. Objections were timely filed by Defendant. The objections in essence repeat arguments raised before the magistrate judge and addressed in the Report and Recommendation. It is noteworthy that, contrary to the reference in the objections, the Report and Recommendation did not resolve issues of disputed facts. The Report and Recommendation found sufficient evidence of record existed to raise the issues of disputed fact which will be resolved by a jury. Specifically, the jury will resolve the genuine issues of fact related to whether Lennox is disabled or was regarded as disabled within the meaning of ADA and whether Defendant failed to meet its duty to engage in the interactive process in good faith and provide reasonable accommodations.

After review of the pleadings and submissions of the parties, together with the Report and Recommendation and the objections of Defendant, the following Order is entered:

AND NOW, this 19th day of March, 2008:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment be denied.

The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Lenihan is adopted as the Opinion of the Court.

Honorable Joy Flowers Conti United States District Judge

20080319

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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