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

I pm|wW____+_&_________
I
I I Case 3:00-cv-00973-AHN Document 45 Filed 1 1/O3/2003 Page 1 of 3 I
: I T`\ r--H-` I
I I _ ... M _ I
I R I v iz n ¥
I UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F I L E D
I ‘ ‘ — DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT I
WIII II" —I?INID “’ 2q I
I C.A. NO.: 3:00 C 9 (A )(HBF) I
-.. , X ,*1 ’\ * "° I
I TIMOTHY HAYES U5 UIS I TEILI %~I’$iR‘ I
' ’ I BRIIEGIWITITI LI I
Plaintifii ) I
I ) F
I V. ) I
‘ COMPASS GROUP USA, INC., ) I
d/b/a EUREST DINING SERVICES) I
I and CARY ORLANDI, ) `
> I
I Defendants. ) .
2 I

DEFENDAN'I`S’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, defendants Compass Group USA, Inc. I
‘ ("Compass”) and Cary Orlandi ("Orlandi"), move this Court to enter summary judgment on all
I
` counts contained in plaintiff] Timothy Hayes’ ("Hayes") Complaint because there is no genuine I
issue of material fact and Compass and Orlandi are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. I I
Although Hayes claims that he was terminated because of his age (47 years old), and to I
deny him severance benefits to which he claims entitlement under ERISA, he has identified no I
_ evidence that Orlandi, who made the decision to terminate him, harbored any bias toward Hayes I
. I
because of his age or acted with any intention to deny him benefits to which he was entitled.
I
I
Likewise, there is no evidence showing that the reason Compass gave for the decision to end I
Hayes’ employment, poor performance, lacks credence or legitimacy. I
I
- I Count I: Alleged Violation of Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA"); Count II: Alleged Age
Discrimination in violation of Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act; Count Ill: Alleged violation of I
Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA"); Count IV: Alleged Intentional lntliction of Emotional I
I Distress; Count V: Alleged Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress; Count VI: Alleged Defamation.
ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED I
ff I ei `-`` ”i
`iiTTR£;’·’— ;;‘gg.5g§.;a;g_egr;_gi%,;§g_;g;;£,,;,;g.;i2£,g._g_Qi____rT ` " ` TT · ··`r - —-- - 4 as . -.- _ _ ___,,___g
""*R;*;’=* ;:‘§§r%liz1;.e2s;fseg¢yae_;;;ee;;~si:$.3,,,.4.g_qg__:___ T T ` " ‘ Tw- · TT - —— . -- . no _ ___,_____

`
; l
{ i U Case 3:00-cv-OO97iAl—|N Document 45 Filed 11/OI?2r5)O3 Page 2 of 3
1 I _ ·¤··» ._ . -/ ..,
, Hayes also has failed t0 produce evidence that could support his additional claims {
r
{ E- alleging defamation and negligent or intentional infliction of emotional distress. Because there is
\ no evidence from which a reasonable person could conclude that the defendants acted unlawfully l
in terminating Hayes’s employment, Compass’s motion for summary judgment should be
granted in its entirety. Q
In further support of this Motion, Compass and Orlandi incorporate the accompanying I
Statement of Undisputed Material Facts and Legal Elements in Support of Defendants’ Cross-
Motion for Summary Judgment (“SOF"), the Affidavit of Counsel and Defendants’ i
r i
Memorandum In Support of Their Cross-Motion For Summary Judgment. l
f I
- WHEREFORE, defendants Compass Group USA, Inc. and Cary Orlandi request that the
i Court dismiss the Complaint in its entirety and award Compass and Orlandi their costs in this
I
action.
Y
COMPASS GROUP, USA, INC. and
A CA a mor,
. By ei r • neys,
a 6 il . E Q
·_ p hristopher A. Ke y, BBO #55651 * Q3 It-I l
` `iii ‘ Margaret H. Paget, BBO # 567679 ’ {-, $l5`ZZ>l(a
. Sherin and Lodgen LLP
100 Summer Street
_ Boston, Massachusetts 02110 A
‘ (617) 646-2000
I Dated: October 30, 200-3 llni J
l
i ~ i i E
- t hereby certify that e true copy ofthe above document
Q was served upon the attorney of record tor each other I
PBM byrnatltby hand) "‘ 3 ” "0 . `
. 6{;¤¢f‘.»r/QHUL I
7 . 2


I I I
I
Case 3:00-cv-OO97€=7¤5HN Document 45 Filed 11/Og/;’?O3 Page 3 of 3 I
· · —# UNITED STATES DISTRICT CO
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT I _ _ _ N
I ...1Ia......i........».......»......*......._.......“_ X E D SI
Timothy Hayes I mm NOV *3 D u, 2q I
vs, iCivil No. 3:00 cv 973 (AH(l{l%_g I;I COUIQ
I : "iI· ·`fiICT
I Compass Group USA : I
I ....--.......»».».......-s.......—...............»... it
ORDER RETURNING SUBMISSION
i E
The Clerk has received your Motion for Summary Judgment, Memo in Support, Local Rule 56{a]§1[,
and Affidavit however, it is deficient in the area(s) checked below:
I (NOTE: L.R. refers to the Local Rules, District of Connecticut) I
I
Â¥ 1. L L.R.S (b) _ No certificate of service attached to pleading I
_ __•{_ Certificate of service fails to list names and addresses of all parties I
_ served
` _ Certificate of service is not signed Q
2, _ L.R.5(d) Failure to submit document under seal A
3._L.R.10 _Failurc »,; - I · I _ I -` I· V I - . I- I I
- _ Failure. e· I I _·-_ ‘ p I ' I II I
I _Ma1-gin __ . up p __ ' I I - '• I iQ I 2
j __Lefth:I ’ -- I II I
- __JucIge't __ I-I ·-go -I ·- ‘ j I_ _.·: I _· I I
I —D¤¤k=* d I vuali I S II I I I I I I
I __Failure I '_ ``·i I "`* I fi; —__I II _'I_-. ·~ · I * E I -
I 4. _L.R.68 Failure to -—I " a` jg, ‘ I_ _ 4 :‘’ `- _ I -_ It - A
5 LR831(d) M · { I _ .
I -- · · · °“°“ C ‘ I §·‘·{· _ I@>··? -‘‘I-·· _ II I -.I_:L Ii-¤ ‘_ · YI I· ·
· ‘ ·-’ I _ j` I.` ___) I __ I II -5, -`-,' I_
6. _Other ____ H . __ .j_ .._. { I I ._._ .. I- __ _- In i _
I The CIBYK is hereby Ofd€f€d [0‘_I€[],1]‘;’- In I, _ . I II I _ LIIZ I ‘ . I ‘ ` `
I Date: \ O 3 \ D 3 E V-
United States District Judge
I T S
( M ) rev. 1/1/03
r_IlIIIm T'