Case ID: f-appx_452/html/0073-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jennifer HEAPHY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WEBSTER CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 11-759-cv.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    Feb. 14, 2012.
    Steven E. Laprade (Christine A. Agola, on the brief), Christine A. Agola, PLLC, Brighton, N.Y., for appellant.
    Michael P. McClaren (Ryan G. Smith, on the brief), Webster Szanyi LLP, Buffalo, N.Y., for appellee.
    PRESENT: B.D. PARKER, RICHARD C. WESLEY, RAYMOND J. LOHIER, JR., Circuit Judges.
   SUMMARY ORDER

Appellant appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (Larimer, J.) that granted Defendant-Appellee Webster Central School District’s (the “School District”) motion for summary judgment. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues presented for review.

We review a district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo and draw all factual inferences in favor of the non-moving party. See Paneccasio v. Unisource Worldwide, Inc., 532 F.3d 101, 107 (2d Cir.2008). “Summary judgment is appropriate only if there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Kuebel v. Black & Decker Inc., 643 F.3d 352, 358 (2d Cir.2011) (internal quotation marks omitted).

For substantially the same reasons set forth in the district court’s thorough and well-reasoned decision and order, we conclude that the district court properly granted summary judgment to the School District on Plaintiff-Appellant Jennifer Heaphy’s claims of unlawful discrimination and retaliation.

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.