Summary
explaining that summary judgment on hostile work environment claim would be appropriate where plaintiff failed to allege such a claim in EEOC Charge or Complaint
Summary of this case from Boyd v. Province Healthcare Company, Inc.Opinion
Civil Action 1:02-CV-1651-MHS.
April 9, 2004
Roland V. Johnson, Lawrenceville, GA, Plaintiff Pro Se.
Christine E. Howard, D. Albert Branen, Fisher Phillips, Atlanta, GA, for Defendant.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendant's motion for summary judgment and the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (RR) recommending that Court grant the motion as to plaintiffs federal law claims and dismiss plaintiff's (state law claims. Although plaintiff filed a document labeled "objections," plaintiff (does not explain how the RR is incorrect. Rather, plaintiff criticizes the Judge's previous orders granting plaintiffs attorneys' motions to withdraw and explains how an injury to his large toe prevented him from testifying truthfully during his deposition. Plaintiff urges the Court to deny defendant's motion for summary judgment because dismissal will deny plaintiff "justice and his day in court."
After a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that plaintiff's objections are without merit, concludes that the RR is correct, ADOPTS the RR [#101-1], GRANTS defendant's motion for summary judgment as to plaintiffs federal claims [#77-1], DISMISSES without prejudice plaintiff's state law claims, and DISMISSES this action [#1-1].
IT IS SO ORDERED.