CASSANDRA THOMPSON v. FRESH PRODUCTS, LLC; DAWN SHAFERLY - Articles

All Content

CASSANDRA THOMPSON v. FRESH PRODUCTS, LLC; DAWN SHAFERLY

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Jan 15, 2021

Head Comment: WHITE delivered a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Daniel S. Dubow, THE SPITZ LAW FIRM, LLC, Beachwood, Ohio, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Carrie L. Urrutia, EASTMAN & SMITH LTD., Toledo, Ohio, for Appellees.

Attorneys 3: ARGUED and ON BRIEF: James M. Tucker, EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Daniel S. Dubow, Brian D. Spitz, THE SPITZ LAW FIRM, LLC, Beachwood, Ohio, for Appellant.

Attorneys 5: ON BRIEF: Carrie L. Urrutia, Emilie K. Vassar, EASTMAN & SMITH LTD., Toledo, Ohio, for Appellees.

Judge(s): GUY, BOGGS, and WHITE, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Toledo

BOGGS, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff Cassandra Thompson brought this employment-discrimination action against her former employer, Fresh Products, LLC, and the human-resources manager of Fresh Products, Dawn Shaferly (together, “Fresh Products”), after she was laid off as part of a reduction-in-force. Thompson alleged disability discrimination, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101–12117; age discrimination, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621–634; race discrimination, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2–2000e-5; and disability and race discrimination, in violation of Ohio law, Ohio Rev. Code §§ 4112.01–4112.99. The district court granted summary judgment to Fresh Products on all claims, and Thompson appealed.

Because Thompson has not established a prima facie case of discrimination, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment.

Attachments: