Summary Judgment for Defendant in Title VII Action Affirmed, and Criminal Matter

By FindLaw Staff on July 29, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

Dodd v. US, No. 09-3345, involved defendant's appeal from the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. section 2255 motion for post-conviction relief as untimely.  The court of appeals affirmed in part on the ground that most of the claims in defendant's amended motion did not arise from the same operative facts as the allegations made in the original motion.  However, the court reversed in part on the ground that the fact that defendant's amended motion identified the legal basis of the objectionable nature of certain testimony as being too speculative did not change its factual similarity to defendant's original motion.

Fercello v. Cty. of Ramsey, No. 09-2587, involved a retaliation action against a county, plaintiff's former employer, under Title VII.  The Eighth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for defendant on the grounds that 1) the actions taken by the county supposedly constituting a "functional demotion" were not materially adverse employment actions; 2) even if defendant's performance review constituted materially adverse employment action, a reasonable jury could not find that it was causally related to plaintiff's harassment report; and 3) plaintiff did not put forth evidence that the time-tracking procedures employed by defendant were implemented in any part because of plaintiff's harassment report.

Related Resources

Copied to clipboard