Free Motion for Summary Judgment - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 95.9 kB
Pages: 3
Date: June 22, 2004
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 740 Words, 4,929 Characters
Page Size: 612.72 x 1008 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/22490/78-1.pdf

Download Motion for Summary Judgment - District Court of Connecticut ( 95.9 kB)


Preview Motion for Summary Judgment - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:03-cv—00373;RNC Document 78 Filed 06/18/2004 Page 1 of 3 l
O O I}
i EJZMII ‘ .
l lt,. E D A
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W, H M I_,_ __
oisrmcr or comvacrrcur Ml M l 8 r’ it J 8
RICHARD A. Mvmzs, ET AL, ; fj; {tr ti] r‘;Q1gi~i’a‘
Piaamarrs ; CIVIL Action No;5 .1··. ri i l- CMD LT
: 3:03-CV-00373 (RNC)
V. :
TOWNSHIP OF TRUMBULL, ET AL,
Defendants : JUNE 17, 2004
DEFENDANTS’ SPECTAGUARD ACQUISITIONS, LLC AND
MICHAEL {LNU| MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Pursuant to Rule 56(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and Local Rule
56(b), the Defendants, Spectaguard and Michael (LNU) (hereinafter referred to as the
"Spectaguard Defendants"), hereby move for the entry of Summary Judgment in their
favor on all counts of the Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint directed to the Spectaguard
Defendants. As is more particularly set forth in the memorandum of law file in support -
of this motion under the undisputed facts set forth in Rule 56(a) Statement and the
affidavit of Michael Hokanson, the Spectaguard Defendant Michael Hokanson (who is
believed to be Michael [LNU]), the Spectaguard Defendants are entitled to judgment as a
matter of law because (1), the plaintiffs cannot recover damages under 42 U.S.C. §2000a
because the Westfield Shoppingtown Trumbull mall, a privately owned mall on private
property, where the Spectaguard Defendants were contracted to provide security, is not a
place of public accommodation, (2) the plaintiffs have failed to exhaust any and all
applicable administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C. §2000a prior to commencing this
action; (3) the plaintiffs cannot establish the elements necessary to establish a prima facie
case of discrimination under 42 U.S.C. §l98l, (4) the plaintiffs cannot satisfy the
Cella, Flanagan 8: Weber, P.C. ` '
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW
21 Washington Avenue P.O. Box 221 North Haven, CT 06473-0221
rar. zuam-assi mx z¤s-zz4.z974 _ [
iiii‘i‘
A-A....
in
_, ·__ H __ W H ifi""""””"""""‘$";‘*'>§?*'?e?·?»€$i`!a‘é.?;T’§§3·§§'§iiisféi-§—§—§;;t35=a=sz·g,;r;,;,i,,,;,_,,_,_.___, I - I - Th-? I - I ` W ' H ' W 7 H · H 7 H - W — H - ri A " . or , " _ " _ " _ or i ·· _ —- 7 -- _ ~ 7 .. _ 7. 7 .. - _. __ __

Case 3j:O3-cv—OO37é§d§NC Document 78 Filed 06/@$004 Page 2 of 3
.1,/ _
elements necessary to establish a prima facie of conspiracy to discriminate under 42
U.S.C. §1985 and {$1986; and (5) there are no facts to support the plaintiffs’ claims that
the Spectaguard Defendants are liable to them for false imprisonment. For all these i
reasons, the Spectaguard Defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
In support of this motion, the Spectaguard Defendants filed the following:
l
1. Rule 56a statement of material facts that the Spectaguard Defendants
submit are undisputed;
2. An Affidavit of Michael Hokanson, a Spectaguard employee present at the
time of the incident referenced in the plaintiffs’ amended complaint; and
3. A Memorandum of Law in Support ofthe Spectaguard Defendants’
Motion for Summary Judgment.
WHEREFORE, the Spectaguard Defendants respectfully request that their
motion be granted and that the Court enter an order of summary judgment in their favor.
THE DEFENDANTS, SPECTAGUARD
and MICHAEL (LNU),
BY: ct.
Robert . Flanag , Jr., Esq.
Celia, Flanag & Weber, P.C. ,
21 Washington Avenue i
North Haven, CT 06473
Tel. (203) 239-5851 l
Federal Bar No. 18549 V
J
i
i
Cella, Flanagain Sc Weber, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AND (ZOUNSELORS AT LAW
2] Washington Avenue P.O. Box 221 North Haven, CT 06473-0221
TEL zos-2s9-sssr mx 202.-2s4-2974 _
"`“’“"“i""“""‘”“*t" ·—-j·~r-#—·—-···—-—-— ·—-·-····- - i-----..-... ..

I
Case 3-:03-cv—OO37€§NC Document 78 Filed 06/1/85004 Page 3 of 3
_ -a.a L
l
CERTIFICATION I
THIS IS T0 CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing was mailed, postage prepaid, ,
to the following counsel:
Cynthia H. Hardaway, Esq.
Hunt, Hamlin & Ridley
Military Park Building
60 Park Place, Suite 1602
Newark, NJ 07102
Michael T. McCormack, Esq.
Tyler, Cooper & Alcorn, LLP
185 Asylum Street
CityPlace I
35 Floor
Hartford, CT 06103-3802
Stuart Brown, Esq.
Hassett & George
555 Franklin Avenue
Hartford, CT 06114
l
F`}
ROBE . FLANA , IR.
6/li? 0°l
Cella, Flanagan 8: Weber, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AND (DOUNSELORS AT LAW
21 Washington Avenue P.O. Box 221 North Haven, CT 06473-0221
rar. 203-239-585l mx zos-zs4.z974 q
w+—·—————--———--——-----—----—.-...............-.....» .g.........;........._..... ___. .... l