Skip to main content

Jones v. St. Jude Medical S.C., Inc.

S.D. OhioSeptember 29, 2011No. 2:08-cv-1047Cited 24 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
George C. Smith
Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
442 Civil rights jobs
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment
State
Ohio

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

DiscriminationRetaliationWage TheftHostile Work Environment

Outcome

The court granted the employer's motion for summary judgment, finding insufficient evidence of race and sex discrimination, retaliation, or wage discrimination. The plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case or to demonstrate pretext for the adverse employment actions.

What This Ruling Means

**Jones v. St. Jude Medical: Discrimination Case Dismissed** This case involved a worker named Jones who filed a discrimination lawsuit against their employer, St. Jude Medical S.C., Inc., a medical device company. Jones claimed they faced workplace discrimination, though the specific details of what type of discrimination occurred are not provided in the available information. The court dismissed Jones's case in September 2011. When a case is dismissed, it means the court decided not to proceed with the lawsuit, either because the worker didn't provide enough evidence to support their claims or because there were legal problems with how the case was filed. No damages were awarded to Jones. **What This Means for Workers:** This case serves as a reminder that winning discrimination lawsuits requires strong evidence and proper legal procedures. Workers who believe they've experienced discrimination should document incidents carefully, including dates, witnesses, and any written communications. It's also important to follow company complaint procedures and consider consulting with an employment attorney early in the process. While this particular case was unsuccessful, workers still have important legal protections against workplace discrimination, and many similar cases do succeed when properly prepared and presented.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.