Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-1_05-cv-01087/USCOURTS-arwd-1_05-cv-01087-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 29:185 Labor/Mgt. Relations (Contracts)

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

EL DORADO DIVISION

KENNETH MODICA PLAINTIFF

 

V. CASE NO. 05-CV-1087

PAPER, ALLIED-INDUSTRIAL,

CHEMICAL AND ENERGY

WORKERS INTERNATIONAL

UNION DEFENDANT

JUDGMENT

Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed December 3, 2010, by the

Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. 

(Doc. 76). Judge Bryant recommends that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 50)

be granted in its entirety, that judgment be entered against Plaintiff, and that the case be dismissed

with prejudice. Plaintiff has responded with timely objections. (Doc. 77). After reviewing the

record de novo, the Court adopts Judge Bryant’s Report and Recommendation as its own.

Plaintiff brought suit against Defendant alleging a breach of Defendant’s duty of fair

representation in the handling of Plaintiff’s grievance following his termination from El Dorado

Chemical Company. Judge Bryant concluded that Plaintiff failed to establish that his discharge was

in violation of the collective bargaining agreement between him and El Dorado Chemical Company. 

For Plaintiff to prevail in this action, he must not only show that Defendant breached its duty of fair

representation but also that his discharge was in violation of the collective bargaining agreement. 

Case 1:05-cv-01087-HFB Document 78 Filed 01/05/11 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>
Hines v. Anchor Motor Freight, 424 U.S. 554, 5 70 (1976). Plaintiff argues that there are genuine

issues of material fact as to whether the collective bargaining agreement was violated. Viewing the

facts in the light most favorable to Defendant and after reviewing Plaintiff’s supporting affidavits,

the Court finds that the affidavits do not raise a genuine issue as to any material fact that would

preclude summary judgment. Plaintiff fails to offer any proof that would allow a jury to find that

his termination was in violation of the collective bargaining agreement. Accordingly, the Court 

adopts the Report and Recommendation of Judge Bryant. It is hereby ordered that Defendant’s

Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 50) is GRANTED and Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED

WITH PREJUDICE.

IT IS SO ORDERED, this 5th day of January, 2011. 

/s/ Harry F. Barnes 

Hon. Harry F. Barnes 

United States District Judge

-2-

Case 1:05-cv-01087-HFB Document 78 Filed 01/05/11 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>