FULMER v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE et al, No. 2:2008cv01630 - Document 28 (W.D. Pa. 2009)
Court Description: OPINION resolving Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge David S. Cercone on 8/27/09. (mwm)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
in the workplace against a fellow employee. To the contrary, Emigh s conduct toward the Commonwealth employee was outside the employer/employee relationship and Fulmer s opposition was not grounded in any action by PSP toward its employees that reasonably could be perceived as being in violation of Title VII. Consequently, Title VII s anti-retaliation provision is not implicated by the allegations of the complaint and defendants motion must be granted on this claim. For the reasons set forth above, defendant s motion will be granted as to plaintiff s ยง 1983 claim against defendants SPS and Miller and all defendants in their official capacity and plaintiff s Title VII claim. The motion will be denied in all other aspects. Date: August 27, 2009 s/ David Stewart Cercone David Stewart Cercone United States District Judge cc: Samuel J. Pasquarelli, Esquire Sherrard, German and Kelly Two PNC Plaza, 28th Floor 620 Liberty Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Mary Lynch Friedline, Esquire Office of Attorney General Fifth Floor, Manor Complex 564 Forbes Avenue Pittsburgh , PA 15219 11
]]>
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.
