Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute For Self Development v. Target Corp.

United States District Court, M.D. Alabama

February 9, 2015

ROSA AND RAYMOND PARKS INSTITUTE FOR SELF DEVELOPMENT, Plaintiff,
v.
TARGET CORPORATION, Defendant

Page 1257

For Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute For Self Development, Plaintiff: Gwendolyn Thomas Kennedy, LEAD ATTORNEY, Kennedy Law Group, LLC, Montgomery, AL.

For Target Corporation, Defendant: Helen Kathryn Downs, LEAD ATTORNEY, Butler Snow LLP, Birmingham, AL; James R. Steffen, LEAD ATTORNEY, Faegre Baker Daniels, Minneapolis, MN; Mary Andreleita Walker, LEAD ATTORNEY, Faegre Baker Daniels LLP, Minneapolis, MN.

Page 1258

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

W. Keith Watkins, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

Before the court is a motion For summary judgment (Doc. # 56) filed by Defendant Target Corporation. Plaintiff Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute For Self Development (the " Parks Institute" ) filed a response in opposition to the motion (Doc. # 60), to which Target replied (Doc. # 66). After careful review of the arguments, evidence, and relevant law, the court finds that Target's motion For summary judgment is due to be granted.

I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

The court exercises subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332.[1]

Page 1259

Personal, jurisdiction and venue are uncontested.

II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

To succeed on summary judgment, the movant must demonstrate " that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and [that it] is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). The court must view the evidence and the inferences from that evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmovant. Jean-Baptiste v. Gutierrez, 627 F.3d 816, 820 (11th Cir. 2010).

The party moving For summary judgment " always bears the initial responsibility of informing the district court of the basis For its motion." Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986). This responsibility includes identifying the portions of the record illustrating the absence of a genuine dispute of material fact. Id.; Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(1)(A) . Alternatively, the movant can assert, without citing to the record, that the nonmoving party " cannot produce admissible evidence to support" a material fact. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(1)(B). If the movant meets its burden, the burden shifts to the nonmoving party to establish - with evidence beyond the pleadings - that a genuine dispute material to each ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.