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.

Pearson v. Reynolds Sch. Dist. #7

United States District Court, D. Oregon

February 24, 2014

MARIE PEARSON, Plaintiff,
v.
REYNOLDS SCHOOL DISTRICT #7, IVAN L. LEIGH, and JEFF GILBERT, Defendants

Page 1005

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 1006

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 1007

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 1008

For Marie Pearson, an individual, Plaintiff: William J. Macke, LEAD ATTORNEY, Law Offices of William J. Macke, Portland, OR.

For Reynolds School District #7, an agency of the State of Oregon, Defendant: Peter R. Mersereau, LEAD ATTORNEY, Barrett C. Mersereau, Mersereau & Shannon, LLP, Portland, OR; Blake H. Fry, Mersereau Shannon LLP, Portland, OR.

For Ivan L. Leigh, an individual, Defendant: Barrett C. Mersereau, Mersereau & Shannon, LLP, Portland, OR; Blake H. Fry, Mersereau Shannon LLP, Portland, OR.

OPINION

Page 1009

ORDER

ANNA J. BROWN, United States District Judge.

Magistrate Judge Dennis James Hubel issued Findings and Recommendation (#47) on November 18, 2013, in which he recommends the Court grant in part and deny in part Defendants' Motion (#34) for Summary Judgment. Specifically, the Magistrate Judge recommends the Court:

(1) grant Defendants' Motion as to all claims against Defendants Ivan L. Leigh and Jeff Gilbert;
(2) grant Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's Title VII claim for disparate treatment;
(3) grant Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's Title VII claim for retaliation for filing a complaint with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry (BOLI);
(4) grant Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress;
(5) grant Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's claim for negligent supervision;
(6) grant Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's claim for punitive damages;
(7) deny Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's Title VII claim for retaliation claim as related to retaliation for Plaintiff's April 2010 internal discrimination complaint;
(8) deny Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's Title VII claim for hostile work environment; and
(9) dismiss Defendants Ivan L. Leigh and Jeff Gilbert from this matter as improper parties.

Defendants filed timely Objections to the Findings and Recommendation in which they object to the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to deny Defendants'

Page 1010

Motion for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiff's Title VII claim for hostile work environment and to deny in part Plaintiff's Title VII retaliation claim. Plaintiff filed untimely[1] Objections to the Findings and Recommendation in which Plaintiff objects to the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to grant Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's Title VII claim for retaliation for filing a complaint with BOLI. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) (1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72 (b).

When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) (1). See also Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) ( en banc ) .

In their Objections Defendants and Plaintiff reiterate the arguments contained in the Motion for Summary Judgment, Response to Motion for Summary Judgment, and Reply and stated at oral argument. This Court has carefully considered the Objections of Defendants and Plaintiff and concludes they do not provide a basis to modify the Findings and Recommendation. The Court also has reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and does not find any error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Hubel's Findings and Recommendation (#47) and, therefore, GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants' Motion (#34) for Summary Judgment as follows:

(1) GRANTS Defendants' Motion as to all claims against Defendants Ivan L. Leigh and Jeff Gilbert;
(2) GRANTS Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's Title VII claim for disparate treatment;
(3) GRANTS Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's Title VII claim for retaliation for filing a complaint with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry (BOLI);
(4) GRANTS Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress;
(5) GRANTS Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's claim for negligent supervision;
(6) GRANTS Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's claim for punitive damages;
(7) DENIES Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's Title VII claim for retaliation claim as related to retaliation for Plaintiff's April 2010 internal discrimination complaint;
(8) DENIES Defendants' Motion as to Plaintiff's Title VII claim for hostile work environment; and
(9) DISMISSES Defendants Ivan L. Leigh and Jeff Gilbert from this matter as improper parties.

Accordingly, this matter proceeds only against Defendant Reynolds School District #7 as to Plaintiff's (1) Title VII retaliation claim related to alleged retaliation for her April 2010 internal discrimination complaint and (2) Title VII claim for hostile work environment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.