Harris v. SmithKline Beecham
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
LOWELL A. REED, Jr., District Judge.
Before the Court is the motion of defendant SmithKline Beecham (“SmithKline”) for summary judgment on all of the claims of plaintiff Marlene Harris (“Harris”). Because I conclude that Harris has not sustained her burden to establish a genuine issue of material fact on any of her claims and that her claims for retaliation and discrimination on the basis of sex, age, and disability were not included in her charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), the motion will be granted.
I. Background
The following facts are gleaned from…
2Cases cited44 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
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Bailey v. StorlazziSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
- Collins v. Kimberly-Clark Pennsylvania, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2017
- Bullock v. Children's Hosp. of PhiladelphiaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1999
- Howard v. Blalock Electric Service, Inc.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2010
- Mufti v. AARSAND & CO., INC.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2009
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.