Koci v. Central City Optical Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
DALZELL, District Judge.
We consider here the motion to dismiss plaintiff Roxanne Koci’s claims that Central City Optical Company, doing business as Philadelphia Eyeglass Labs ' (“PEL”), discriminated against her for a perceived disability and/or her association with her disabled son, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq., and the Pennsylvania Hu*485man Relations Act (“PHRA”), 43 P.S. §§ 951 et seq.
For the reasons detailed below, we will grant PEL’s motion.
I. Factual Allegations
Plaintiff Roxanne Koci is a fifty-year old woman who worked…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Fowler v. UPMC SHADYSIDECourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
- Sutton v. United Air Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Dean Hedges v. United States of America Environmental Moorings InternationalCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Cook v. City of PhiladelphiaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2015
- Sine v. Rockhill Mennonite HomeDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2017
- Charles v. Citizens & Northern BankDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2023
- FREEMAN v. MOORE EYE CARE, P.C.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2022
- MULHERN v. SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES USA INC.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2022
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.