Legal Opinion
Cameron Burnett v. Penske Logistics
District Court, S.D. Texas
Decided May 20, 2026No. 4:24-cv-04732Unknown
1Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT May 20, 2026 Nathan Ochsner, Clerk SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION CAMERON BURNETT, § Plaintiff, § § v. § CIVIL NO. 4:24-CV-04732 § PENSKE LOGISTICS, § Defendant. § JUDGE PALERMO’S ORDER & REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION This is an employment retaliation case. Pending before the Court are Defendant Penske Logistics’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 40, and pro se Plaintiff Cameron Burnett’s Motion to Compel, ECF No. 45.1 Having considered the briefing,2 evidence, and applicable law, the Court finds Plaintiff’s motion to compel should be denied and…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- University of Tex. Southwestern Medical Center v. NassarSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Forsyth v. BarrCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.