Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-7_04-cv-01022/USCOURTS-alnd-7_04-cv-01022-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Joseph Dickey
Plaintiff
St. Vincent Hospital
Defendant

Document Text:

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

WESTERN DIVISION

Joseph Dickey, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) Civil Action No. 7:04-cv-01022

)

St. Vincent Hospital, )

)

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION ON DEFENDANT’S 

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Plaintiff Joseph Dickey (“Dickey”) filed this action on May 18, 2004,

alleging claims of sexual harassment and retaliation, in violation of Title VII of

the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. Defendant St. Vincent

Hospital (“St. Vincent”) filed its Motion For Summary Judgment, arguing that it

was due Summary Judgment on Dickey’s sexual harassment and retaliation claims. 

(Docs. 15, 16.)

In its Response to Defendant’s Motion For Summary Judgment, Dickey did

not address its retaliation claim and has therefore abandoned said claim. Lindsey

v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Co., 226 F.Supp. 2d 1338, 1343 (N.D.

Ala. 2003), affd., 2004 U.S. App. Lexis 13142 (11th Cir. 2004.) Accordingly, St.

FILED

 2005 May-18 PM 01:42

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 7:04-cv-01022-UWC Document 24 Filed 05/18/05 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Vincent’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Dickey’s retaliation claim is due to

be GRANTED. 

Genuine issues of material fact exist regarding Plaintiff’s sex discrimination

claim. Therefore, Defendant St. Vincent’s Motion For Summary Judgment on

Plaintiff’s sex discrimination claim is due to be DENIED. 

By separate order, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment will be

GRANTED on Plaintiff’s retaliation claim, and DENIED on Plaintiff’s sex

discrimination claim.

Done this 18th day of May, 2005.

______________________________

 U.W. Clemon

 Chief United States District Judge

Case 7:04-cv-01022-UWC Document 24 Filed 05/18/05 Page 2 of 2