From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lewis v. Medassets Net Revenue Sys., LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION
Jul 26, 2012
Case No. 3:11-cv-0837 (M.D. Tenn. Jul. 26, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. 3:11-cv-0837

07-26-2012

MALIKAH LEWIS, Plaintiff, v. MEDASSETS NET REVENUE SYSTEMS, LLC, Defendant.


Judge Trauger


ORDER

For the reasons expressed in the accompanying Memorandum, the Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 17) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The defendant's motion for summary judgment as to the plaintiff's failure to promote and disparate treatment claims is GRANTED and the plaintiff's Complaint is accordingly DISMISSED. The defendant's motion as to its breach of contract counterclaim is DENIED. Instead, summary judgment is GRANTED to the plaintiff and the breach of contract counterclaim is accordingly DISMISSED.

The defendant's motion for summary judgment as to its unjust enrichment counterclaim is GRANTED. The defendant has until August 6, 2012 to file an affidavit and documentation supporting the amount it seeks in this counterclaim. The plaintiff shall file any objection to the amount claimed by the defendant by August 16, 2012, after which the court will enter its judgment.

The pretrial conference and trial previously set for this matter are hereby CANCELLED.

It is so Ordered.

______________________

ALETA A. TRAUGER

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Lewis v. Medassets Net Revenue Sys., LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION
Jul 26, 2012
Case No. 3:11-cv-0837 (M.D. Tenn. Jul. 26, 2012)
Case details for

Lewis v. Medassets Net Revenue Sys., LLC

Case Details

Full title:MALIKAH LEWIS, Plaintiff, v. MEDASSETS NET REVENUE SYSTEMS, LLC, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION

Date published: Jul 26, 2012

Citations

Case No. 3:11-cv-0837 (M.D. Tenn. Jul. 26, 2012)

Citing Cases

Castro v. Fire Door Sols.

There was no specific duration of time for Mr. Castro's employment (Doc. No. 35-1 at 208-209), so his…