Legal Opinion
Rowland v. Walker
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided February 21, 2003No. CIV.A. 01-567(JMF)PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
FACCIOLA, United States Magistrate Judge.
Currently ripe and ready for resolution is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (“Defs.Mot.”). For the reasons articulated below, defendants’ motion will be granted.
BACKGROUND
Dwight Rowland (“plaintiff’) is suing David Walker, the Comptroller General of the General Accounting Office (“Walker”), Michele M. Hamilton, a Human Resources Manager at GAO (“Hamilton”), and Timothy DiNapoli, a Supervisor at GAO (“DiNapoli”), for employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e et seq.…
2Cases cited17 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
- Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. MorganSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Brown v. General Services AdministrationSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Everson v. Medlantic Healthcare GroupDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2006
- Kakeh v. United Planning Organization, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2008
- Davis v. GeithnerDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
- Sims v. Consumer Financial Protection BureauDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2026