Parker v. Scheck Mech., Corp.

Full title: GENERAL PARKER, Plaintiff, v. SCHECK MECHANICAL, CORP., Defendant.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Date published: Nov 13, 2013

No. 13 C 722 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 13, 2013)

Opinion

No. 13 C 722

11-13-2013

GENERAL PARKER, Plaintiff, v. SCHECK MECHANICAL, CORP., Defendant.

James F. Holderman

Judge James F. Holderman

ORDER GRANTING

DEFENDANT SHECK MECHANICAL CORP.'S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

JAMES F. HOLDERMAN, District Judge:

Defendant Scheck Mechanical Corp.'s motion for summary judgment [32] is granted and judgment is entered in its favor against plaintiff General Parker for the reasons stated in the Statement section of this order. This case is dismissed as to the sole remaining defendant Scheck Mechanical Corp. Each side to bear its own costs, due to plaintiff Parker's pauper status.

Statement

Plaintiff General Parker is a member of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Local Lodge #27 and a resident of Peoria Illinois, who claims he was employed by defendant Scheck Mechanical Corp. ("Scheck Mechanical") in Missouri, but laid off and terminated from his employment because of his race and color. The undisputed material facts, when viewed in plaintiff Parker's favor, see Fitzgerald v. Santoro, 707 F.3d 725, 730 (7^th Cir. 2013), establish that Parker was never employed by defendant Scheck Mechanical, the only remaining defendant in this case. Parker, therefore, cannot maintain any employment discrimination claim against defendant Scheck Mechanical, an Illinois corporation, which focuses its business on piping connections in oil and electric production facilities and never employed boilermaker union member Parker.

Parker seems to have confused defendant Scheck Mechanical with a separate corporate entity, Scheck Industrial Corporation ("Scheck Industrial"), a Minnesota corporation, which allegedly specializes in boiler repair and maintenance.

Parker has argued but has presented no basis to pierce any identified corporate veil. The only remaining defendant in this case, Scheck Mechanical Corp., is entitled to summary judgment based on the undisputed material fact that it never employed plaintiff Parker. This case is dismissed. Each side is to bear its own costs due to plaintiff Parker's pauper status.

ENTER:

______________

JAMES F. HOLDERMAN

District Judge, United States District Court