CourtCases2010

3d 305 312 2d cir1997 the reason provided must be

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Kasdan to warn Henderson "to beware because they were getting rid of the woman in the company and [Henderson] would be next." (Dkt. # 49-4, Henderson Dep., Ex. 2 at 39:7-9.) According to Henderson, these statements were made "on the day that she [Madrisotti] was leaving the facility." (Dkt. # 44, Henderson Dep., Ex. 8 at 38:22-23.) It is unclear from the record whether Madrisotti was still an agent of GE when she made these statements to Henderson. Madrisotti's personal reasons for voluntarily leaving the company, however, are distinct from her authority to speak as an executive. Additionally, the warnings she gave to Henderson do not fall within the scope of her agency powers because she did not provide them within her official capacity as a GE executive. Therefore, Madrisotti's statements do not satisfy 172 Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(D). Accordingly, Henderson's deposition testimony as to what Madrisotti told her is stricken as hearsay. Defendants' motion to strike, as inadmissible hearsay, Henderson's deposition testimony that Gawin, Kasdan and Madrisotti told her that, in their opinion, the reason they were leaving GE IMV was because they were women is GRANTED. [FN6] B. Defendants' Motion For Summary Judgment Henderson accuses defendants of discriminating against her on the basis of her gender in violation of Title VII. Defendants claim Henderson has not brought forth sufficient evidence to sustain her claim and seek summary judgment. 1. Summary Judgment Standard A motion for summary judgment may be granted, "if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue of fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). Summary judgment is appropriate if, after discovery, the nonmoving party "has failed to make a sufficient showing on an essential element of [its] case with respect to which [it] has...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 09/30/2012 for the course ENC 102 taught by Professor Deria during the Spring '08 term at FIU.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online