Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Bingman v. Baltimore County

United States District Court, D. Maryland

September 1, 2016

LARRY R. BINGMAN Plaintiff
v.
BALTIMORE COUNTY, MARYLAND Defendant

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: INJUNCTION MOTION

          Marvin J. Garbis United States District Judge

         The Court has before it Plaintiff's Motion for Injunctive [and other] Relief [ECF No. 92] and the materials submitted relating thereto. The Court finds that a hearing is unnecessary.

         Plaintiff, by the instant motion, seeks:

• Entry of a monetary judgment of $400, 000.00 with costs and post-judgment interest;
• Reinstatement or front pay; . Expungement of reference to cancer treatment from Plaintiff's personnel files at Baltimore County;
• Certain future actions by Baltimore County regarding employees; and
• The opportunity to file a fee petition and bill of costs at least three weeks after the Court enters judgment on the jury's verdict.

         These matters shall be addressed in turn.

         A. Judgment

         The Court shall enter a Judgment pursuant to the jury verdict but anticipates that Baltimore County may file timely post-trial motions relating to the Judgment.

         B. Reinstatement or Front Pay

         The pertinent statute, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(g), provides, in relevant part:

If the court finds that the respondent has intentionally engaged in . . . an unlawful employment practice charged in the complaint, the court may . . . order such affirmative action as may be appropriate, which may include, but is not limited to, reinstatement . . .

         The County responded to Plaintiff's request for reinstatement by stating that “[a]ny reinstatement or award of front pay would have to be accomplished by a hearing. . . .” Def.'s Resp. 3, ECF No. 94. Defendant then referred, however, to the factors related to the issuance ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.