Preview:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND DAVID WARD v. LAWRENCE H. SUMMERS * ***** MEMORANDUM * * * *

Civil No. JFM-00-258

Plaintiff has brought this pro se action for employment discrimination. Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment. Plaintiff has responded to the motion. The motion will be granted. Plaintiff admits (although he says that it was in jest) that he threatened to "shoot up the entire office" if he was passed over for a promotion. He also admits that he lied to his supervisor regarding having received psychiatric treatment. For these offenses he received a ten-day suspension. In his opposition to the summary judgment motion plaintiff alleges that employees of different races were not subjected to similar discipline for similar conduct. However, plaintiff has not cited any acts allegedly committed by other persons as serious as "threatening to shoot up the entire office." Whether said jokingly or not, such a remark relates to work place safety and other employees' right to a comfortable state of mind. On its face, a ten-day suspension for making such a remark is entirely reasonable.

A separate order granting defendant's summary judgment motion and granting judgment on defendant's behalf is being entered herewith.

Date: October 26, 2000

/s/ J. Frederick Motz United States District Judge

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND DAVID WARD v. LAWRENCE H. SUMMERS * ***** ORDER * * * *

Civil No. JFM-00-258

For the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum, it is, this 26th day of October 2000 ORDERED 1. Defendant's motion to dismiss or for summary judgment is treated as one for summary judgment and, as such, is granted; and 2. Judgment is entered in favor of defendants against plaintiff.

/s/ J. Frederick Motz United States District Judge



Download David Ward v Lawrence Summers.pdf

Maryland Law