Tweed v. Rappahannock Regional Jail et al, No. 1:2016cv01164 - Document 94 (E.D. Va. 2017)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Liam O'Grady on 12/14/2017. (awac, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Tweed v. Rappahannock Regional Jail et al Doc. 94 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division TIMOTHY E. TWEED Plaintiff, Case No. l:16-cv-01164 Hon. Liam O'Grady v. RAPPAHANNOCK REGIONAL JAIL, et al. Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 44) and Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 58). Discovery in this case closed on September 28,2017. The Court has thoroughly considered the briefings, giving additional attention and consideration to Mr. Tweed's pro se filings, and dispensed with oral arguments. For the following reasons, the Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to carry his burden to prove a prima facie case for age discrimination under the ADEA and that Plaintiff is unable to show that Defendant's non-discriminatory reasons for terminating Plaintiff were pretextual. An accompanying order has already issued (Dkt. No. 88). I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Timothy Tweed has sued the Rappahannock Regional Jail (RRJ), the RRJ Authority, and four RRJ employees in their individual and official capacities alleging Mr. Tweed was terminated from his position as a probationary correctional officer (CO) because of his age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). Am. Compl. 1-4. RRJ hired plaintiff Mr. Tweed on September29,2014 to serve as a CO. Defendants' Motion for Summary Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
