This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: an attorney present at the meeting. Vickers
spoke with his attorney and thereafter decided to resign from his position at FMC.
*761 Vickers filed a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission ("EEOC") on June 19, 2003, and the EEOC issued a right to sue letter on
July 8, 2003. Vickers filed the instant action against FMC, Anderson, Dixon, Mueller,
and "Jane Doe" Dixon (Dixon's wife) on or about September 19, 2003 in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The complaint alleged sex
discrimination, sexual harassment, and retaliation in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 151 2000e et seq., conspiracy to violate Vickers' equal protection rights in violation of 42
U.S.C. § 1985(3), failure to prevent the conspiracy in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1986, and
twenty-one state law claims.
All defendants-appellees filed a joint motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c) on or about January 21, 2004. On May 5, 2004, the
district court granted defendants-appellees' motion on the federal claims pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c) and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction
over Vickers' state law claims. The district court granted the motion based on the fact that
Title VII does not protect individuals from discrimination based on sexual orientation and
that Supreme Court and Sixth Circuit case law do not recognize Vickers' claims of
harassment based on being perceived as homosexual as violations of Title VII. Vickers
filed a timely notice of appeal. [FN1]
FN1. Although Vickers claims in his brief to be appealing the district court's decision on
all of his federal claims, he fails to make any argument regarding his Title VII retaliation
claim and his claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985(3) and 1986. These claims are therefore
waived. See Robinson v. Jones, 142 F.3d 905, 906 (6th Cir.1998) (issues raised before
district court but not raised on appeal are deemed ab...
View Full Document
- Spring '08