(PS) Lavery-Petrash v. Sierra Nevada Memorial Hospital, et al.,, No. 2:2011cv01520 - Document 75 (E.D. Cal. 2014)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 3/17/2014 ADOPTING IN FULL 73 Findings and Recommendations; DENYING 65 Motion to Dismiss as to the Fourth Amended Complaints claims of age-based discrimination and retaliation against Defendant Dig nity Health; GRANTING 65 Motion to Dismiss as to the Fourth Amended Complaints hostile work environment harassment and negligence claims against all defendants and as to the claims of age-based discrimination and retaliation against the individual defendants; DISMISSING Defendants Annalise O'Connor, David Witthaus, Arthur Dewson and James Heard; DENYING the plaintiff further leave to amend; ORDERING Defendant Dignity Health to file within 21 days, an answer to the surviving claims alleged in the Fourth Amended Complaint. (Michel, G)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NORA LAVERY-PETRASH, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 2:11-cv-1520 GEB DAD PS v. ORDER SIERRA NEVADA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a 18 19 United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). On January 29, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 20 21 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days after service of the 23 findings and recommendations. Plaintiff has filed objection to the findings and 24 recommendations. The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 25 26 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 1 2 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed January 29, 2014 (Dkt. No. 73) are adopted in full; 4 2. Defendants’ June 28, 2013 Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 65) is denied as to the 5 fourth amended complaint’s claims of age-based discrimination and retaliation against defendant 6 Dignity Health; 7 3. Defendants’ June 28, 2013 Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 65) is granted as to the 8 fourth amended complaint’s hostile work environment harassment and negligence claims against 9 all defendants and as to the claims of age-based discrimination and retaliation against the 10 individual defendants; 11 4. The individual defendants are dismissed from this action; 12 5. Plaintiff is not granted further leave to amend; and 13 6. Defendant Dignity Health shall file an answer to the surviving claims alleged in 14 the fourth amended complaint within 21 days of the date of this order. 15 Dated: March 17, 2014 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 /petrash1520.jo.docx 27 28 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.
