Frey v. DeJoy

United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Western Division at Dayton · January 31, 2025 · No. 3:22-cv-00232

Summary

This United States District Court order grants the United States Postal Service’s motion for summary judgment in a pro se employment discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by a former postal employee. Applying the McDonnell Douglas framework, the court found that the plaintiff failed to identify similarly situated employees outside his protected class and did not produce evidence that the employer’s stated reasons for his suspension and termination were pretextual. Consequently, the court entered judgment in favor of the defendant and terminated the case.

Court
United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Western Division at Dayton
Writing for the Court
Michael J. Newman
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Decision date
January 31, 2025
Docket number
3:22-cv-00232
Procedural posture
Defendant's motion for summary judgment
Standard of review
Summary judgment standard under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56
Precedential value
nonprecedential
Disposition
other

Topics

employment discriminationtitle viiada discriminationretaliation

Practice areas

employment lawcivil rights

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Plaintiff established a prima facie case of discrimination or retaliation sufficient to survive summary judgment.
  2. Whether Defendant's stated non‑discriminatory reasons are pretextual.

Holdings

  1. Plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination or retaliation and therefore summary judgment is granted in favor of Defendant.

Key quotations

In practice, a movant need only assert the lack of any genuine disputes of material fact in the record.
This “typically amounts to ‘little more than a formality.’”

Factual background

Reginald Frey was a USPS letter carrier who took sick and annual leave for medical issues, was placed on leave without pay, requested a reasonable accommodation which was denied, received a 14‑day suspension without prior notice in August 2020, and was terminated in December 2020. He alleged the suspension and termination were discriminatory and retaliatory.

Procedural history

Plaintiff filed pro se claims of race, sex, religion, disability discrimination and retaliation under Title VII and the Rehabilitation Act. Defendant moved for summary judgment. Plaintiff failed to respond. The court granted summary judgment in favor of Defendant.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…