Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Buy This Entire Record For
Andrea Sharp v. Milton S. Hershey Medical Center (Penn State
November 23, 2011
ANDREA SHARP, PLAINTIFF,
MILTON S. HERSHEY MEDICAL CENTER (PENN STATE), DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. John E. Jones III
THE BACKGROUND OF THIS MEMORANDUM IS AS FOLLOWS:
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation
("R&R") of Magistrate Judge J. Andrew Smyser (Doc. 39), filed on
November 1, 2011, which recommends that the Defendant's Motion for
Summary Judgment (Doc. 15) be granted, that summary judgment be
entered in favor of the Defendant and that this case be closed. No
objections to the R&R have been filed by any party.*fn1
For the reasons set forth below, the Court will adopt the
When, as here, no objections are made to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, the district court is not statutorily required to review the report before accepting it. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). According to the Third Circuit, however, "the better practice is to afford some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report." Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987). "[T]he court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see also Henderson, 812 F.2d at 878-79 (stating "the failure of a party to object to a magistrate's legal conclusions may result in the loss of the right to de novo review in the district court"); Tice v. Wilson, 425 F. Supp. 2d 676, 680 (W.D. Pa. 2006); Cruz v. Chater, 990 F. Supp. 375-78 (M.D. Pa. 1998); Oldrati v. Apfel, 33 F. Supp. 2d 397, 399 (E.D. Pa. 1998). The Court's examination of this case confirms the Magistrate Judge's determinations.
Plaintiff Andrea Sharp ("Plaintiff" or "Sharp") filed this employment
discrimination case claiming that her employer, Defendant Milton S.
Medical Center (Penn State), discriminated against her*fn2
based on her disability, sex, age, race, and national
origin.*fn3 She also alleges that the Defendant
retaliated against her because she complained of the alleged
The Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, requesting that the Court grant the motion for the following reasons:
1) that the Plaintiff failed to exhaust her administrative remedies before seeking a judicial remedy as to her disability discrimination claims;
2) that some of the Plaintiff's claims are barred because she did not timely file administrative charges as to those claims;
3) that the Plaintiff did not suffer an adverse employment action with respect to some of her discriminations claims;
4) that the Plaintiff has not presented evidence from which a reasonable fact finder could conclude that the legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons asserted by the Defendant for not hiring her for three supervisory positions were pretexts for discrimination;
5) that the Plaintiff has not presented evidence that she was subject to harassment that was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of her ...
Buy This Entire Record For