Legal Opinion
Schindewolf v. City of Brighton
District Court, E.D. Michigan
Decided May 29, 2015No. Case No. 14-12161PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [53]
NANCY G. EDMUNDS, District Judge.
This employment dispute comes before the Court on Defendants City of Brighton and Dana Foster’s motion for summary judgment [53]. Plaintiff Matthew Schindewolfs claims arise from his separation from the City of Brighton on July 23, 2013. (Am. Compl. ¶ 64.) Plaintiffs bring claims pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 el seq., the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) 29 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq., the State of Michigan’s Persons With…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- 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
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- St. Mary's Honor Center v. HicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bair v. Crystal Glass, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2024
- Fortkamp v. City of CelinaDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2016
- Sack v. BarbishDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2021