2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 7-20-2005 

# B roph y v . P hi l a P ol D ept P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 04-3520

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " B r op h y v . P hi l a P o l D ept " (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 803. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/8031 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 04- 3520 WI L L I AM J . BR OP HY,

A ppel l ant v. CI TY O F P HI LAD ELPHI A PO LI CE D EPARTM ENT;

C IT Y O F P H IL A D E L P H IA ,

____________ APP EAL F ROM THE UNI TE D ST ATE S DI S TRI CT C OURT F O R T H E E A S T E R N D IS T R IC T O F P E N N S Y L V A N IA

(D . C . C iv. N o . 0 3 -cv -04 1 3 9 ) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e N or m a L. Shapi r o

____________ Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL . A . R . 34. 1( a)

J ul y15, 2005 B efore: S L O V ITE R , M cK E E and W E IS, C i rcui tJudg es.

( Fi l ed: J ul y20, 2005)

____________ OP I NI ON

W E I S, C i r cui tJ udge.

I n t he y ear2000, atage 73, t he pl ai nt i ff a ppl i ed forempl oym entas a pol i ce offi cerfort he C i t yof Phi l adel phi a butdi d nots ucce s s ful l ycompl et e the tr ai ni ng2

p ro g ra m . H e h a d p re v io u slyb e e n a p o lice o f f ice r f o r th e C ity , b u t lef

t h is p o sitio n in 1 9 5 3 . In th e y e a rs f

o llo w in g h is d e p a rtu re f ro m th e P h ilad e lp h ia P o lice D e p a rtm e n t, p la in tif f w o rk e d in v a ri o u s la w e n f o rc e m e n t c a p a c itie s . A ft erhe had f

i l ed an a ge di s cr i m i nat i on compl ai ntagai ns tt he C i t yw i t h t he E E O C i n 2001, pl ai nt i ff w as admi t t ed t o t he Phi l adel phi a Pol i ce A cade m yfora t enm o n th tra in in g p e rio d . H e d id n o t p a ss th e re q u ire d lo w -le v e l li g h t f ire a rm s te st n o r d id he compl et e the runni ng t es ti n t he pr es cr i bed t i m e. A s a cons equenc e, he di d not g rad u ate f

rom the A ca d em yan d w as n o t hir ed as a p o li ce o ff icer. Pl ai nt i ff f

i l ed s ui ti n t he D i s t r i ctC our tal l egi ng vi ol at i on of the A D E A , 29 U .S .C . § 6 2 6 (b ), a n d th e P e n n s y lv a n ia H u m a n R e la tio n s A c t, 4 3 P a . S ta t. § § 9 5 1 -9 6 3 . T he D i s t r i ctC our tgr ant ed s um m aryj udgm enti n favorof the def endant s and deni ed pl ai nt i ff’ s m ot i on forr econs i der at i on.

I n t hi s appea l , pl ai nt i ff c ont ends t hatt he D i s t r i ctC our terr ed i n: 1. G r ant i ng s um m aryj udgm enton “pr e- aca demy ” cl ai m s , t he s ubj ectof th e p lain tiff ’s f

irst E E O C c o m p lain t. 2. Fai l i ng t o faul tt he C i t yfornotgr ant i ng a w ai verof tr ai ni ng. 3. Fai l i ng t o acknow l edge thatpl ai nt i ff w as di s cr i m i nat or i l ydi s char ged f r o m t h e A c a d e m y. 4. G r ant i ng s um m aryj udgm entundert he PH R A des pi t e a pr etr i al s ever ance . 5. G r ant i ng s um m aryj udgm enti n t he cl ai m s of har as s m entand r et al i at i on.3 6 . F ail ing to ad d ress p lai n ti ff ’s m o ti o n s u n d er F ed . R . C iv. P. 56 (f). W e have car eful l yr evi ew ed ea ch of the pl ai nt i ff’ s cont ent i ons and fi nd t hat th e c laim s la c k m e rit. T h e D istric t C o u rt d id n o t er r in g ra n tin g su m m a ryju d g m e n t in favorof the def

endant s ori n deny i ng t he pl ai nt i ff’ s m ot i on forr econs i der at i on. W e agr ee w ith th e re s u lt s ta te d in th e D is tr ic t C o u rt ’s th o ro u g h o p in io n .

A c c o rd in g ly, th e ju d g m e n t o f th e D is tr ic t C o u rt w ill b e a f f ir m e d .