The Supreme Court Press
Petition of the Month™
Dharma Agrawal v. University of Cincinnati et al.
Dharma Agrawal v. Carlo Montemagno et al.
Winter — December 2014
The Supreme Court Press “Petition of the Month”TM for December 2014 is Dharma Agrawal v. Carlo Montemagno, John Bryan and the University of Cincinnati,. Supreme Court Dkt. No. 14-719, a case arising out of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The petition was filed by attorneys Robert Gutzwiller and David Clodfelter of the firm Clodfelter and Gutzwiller, located in Cincinnati, Ohio.
- Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, can a complaint be dismissed for failing to plead a hostile environment theory of discrimination, simply because the words “hostile environment” were not used in the complaint, but where the complaint otherwise details the facts surrounding a work environment hostile to the petitioner?
- Did the lower court issue an opinion in conflict with Burlington North. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53, 126 S.Ct. 2405 (2006) when it held that the stripping away of petitioner’s job title, reduction of research space, and diversion of research funds, inter alia, did not constitute either the deprivation of a liberty or property interest or an adverse employment action? Furthermore, in reaching this conclusion, did the lower courts err by making factual inferences against the non-moving party, thus depriving petitioner of his right to a jury trial?
- When the complaint alleges deliberately false disciplinary charges and suspension of professor’s pursuit of grants, disruption of professor’s research responsibilities and his physical wellbeing, and professor’s forced expenditure of over $70,000 for attorney’s fees in defending such charges, can a lower court’s determination of no substantive due process claim stand?
Federal Court PressView Map
1089 Commonwealth Avenue
Boston, MA 02215