McConnell v. Canadian Pacific Hills Plaza, No. 4:2011cv00972 - Document 110 (M.D. Pa. 2014)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING IN PART REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ; granting in part and denying in part 85 Defendant's 2/4/13 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 87 Plaintiff's 2/4/13 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 103 Defendant's Moti on to Strike; adopting in part rejecting in part 108 Report and Recommendations. Insofar as Plaintiff's claims rest on alleged discriminatory conditions in the women's restroom and on a potential for the recurrence of alleged discriminatory conditions of non-permanent features, final judgment is entered in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff on these aspects (only) of Plaintiff's claim.Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 1/16/14. (lg)

Download PDF
McConnell v. Canadian Pacific Hills Plaza Doc. 110 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA WILL MCCONNELL, : : : : : : : : : : : Plaintiff, v. CANADIAN PACIFIC HILLS PLAZA, a Pennsylvania Limited Partnership, Defendant. Civil Action No. 4:11-CV-0972 (Judge Brann) (Magistrate Judge Carlson) ORDER January 16, 2014 1. Chief Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson’s September 11, 2013 Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED in part and REJECTED in part. 2. Defendant’s March 7, 2013Motion to Strike is GRANTED. ECF No. 103. 3. Defendant’s February 4, 2013 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. ECF No. 85. 4. Plaintiff’s February 4, 2013 Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. ECF No. 87. 5. Insofar as Plaintiff’s claims rest on alleged discriminatory conditions 1 Dockets.Justia.com in the women’s restroom and on a potential for the recurrence of alleged discriminatory conditions of non-permanent features, final judgment is entered in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff on these aspects of Plaintiff’s claim. BY THE COURT: s/ Matthew W. Brann Matthew W. Brann United States District Judge 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.