EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE – Discrimination; Discovery; Admissions 
Posted: 1:00 am Mon, March 15, 2010
By admin
Where a plaintiff who sued his employer for discrimination and retaliation under the ADA failed to respond to the employer’s requests for admissions, and the plaintiff made no filing with the District Court that could be construed as a motion to amend or withdraw under Rule 36(b) even after being directed to do so, the court properly granted summary judgment to the employer based on the admissions, which bore directly on the issue of liability. Judgment is affirmed.
| Case Number | 09-1226 |
| Case Name | Quasius v. Schwan Food Company, et al. |
| Court | 8th U.S. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS |
| District | Appealed from the District of Minnesota |
| Category | EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE |
![[Print]](http://minnlawyer.com/wp-content/plugins/tdc-sociable-toolbar/print.png)
![[Email]](http://minnlawyer.com/wp-content/plugins/tdc-sociable-toolbar/email_2.png)
![[RSS Feed]](http://minnlawyer.com/wp-content/plugins/tdc-sociable-toolbar/rssfeed.png)
![[Facebook]](http://minnlawyer.com/wp-content/plugins/tdc-sociable-toolbar/facebook.png)
![[Twitter]](http://minnlawyer.com/wp-content/plugins/tdc-sociable-toolbar/twitter.png)


POST A COMMENT