Jason Moberly v. University of Cincinnati Clermont, No. 10-4136 (6th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 12a0477n.06 No. 10-4136 FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT May 07, 2012 LEONARD GREEN, Clerk JASON MOBERLY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI CLERMONT COLLEGE; ANN APPLETON, Individually; KIMBERLY ELLISON, Individually; JAMES MCDONOUGH, Individually, Defendants-Appellees. BEFORE: ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO OPINION MERRITT and COLE, Circuit Judges; VARLAN, District Judge.* PER CURIAM. Plaintiff-Appellant Jason Moberly appeals the district court s grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendants-Appellees University of Cincinnati Clermont College, Assistant Dean of Students Ann Appleton, Director of Student Life Kimberly Ellison, and Dean James McDonough (collectively, Clermont ). Moberly alleges that Clermont initially declined to hire him as assistant basketball coach in retaliation for raising complaints about racial discrimination, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the First Amendment, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d. Despite its initial decision to offer the position to another candidate, Clermont ultimately hired Moberly. * The Honorable Thomas A. Varlan, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Tennessee, sitting by designation. No. 10-4136 Moberly v. University of Cincinnati Clermont College, et al. We review the grant of a motion for summary judgment de novo and view all evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Upshaw v. Ford Motor Co., 576 F.3d 576, 584 (6th Cir. 2009). We may grant summary judgment if, upon review of the pleadings, affidavits, depositions, and answers to interrogatories, we conclude that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). Upon hearing oral argument and carefully reviewing the record, we conclude that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of Clermont on all claims. Accordingly, we AFFIRM for the reasons set forth in the district court opinion. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.