Schemansky v. California Pizza Kitchen, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Michigan
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
ROSEN, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
This Elliott-Larsen sexually hostile work environmeni/retaliation case is pres ently before the Court on Defendant California Pizza Kitchen, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff Charise Schemansky has responded to Defendant’s motion, to which Defendant has replied. The parties have waived oral argument on Defendant’s Motion. Therefore, this matter will be decided on the briefs.
Having reviewed and considered the parties’ briefs and supporting documents, and the entire record of this…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Kalich v. AT & T MOBILITY, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
- Kalich v. AT & T MOBILITY, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2010
- Wright v. Autozone Stores, Inc.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 2013