Dailey v. Accubuilt, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Ohio
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
JEFFREY J. HELMICK, District Judge.
Introduction
Before me are the motions of Defendants Accubuilt, Inc., and United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Local 975, for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56. (See Doc. No. 28 and 30). Plaintiff Darren Dailey filed a memorandum in opposition. (Doc. No. 33). Accubuilt and Local 975 each filed briefs in reply. (Doc. No. 42 and 41). For the reasons stated below, the Defendants’ motions are granted.
Standard
Summary judgment is appropriate where “the movant shows that there is no genuine…
2Cases cited31 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
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- St. Mary's Honor Center v. HicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bryan Anthony Reo v. Martin LindstedtDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2026
- Raleigh v. Service Employees International UnionDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2021