Skip to main content

Holloway v. District of Columbia Government

D.D.C.December 30, 2013No. Civil Action No. 2009-0512Cited 9 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Citation
9 F. Supp. 3d 1, 2013 WL 6857415, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181135
Judge(s)
Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts
Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
Civil
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wrongful Termination

Outcome

The court granted summary judgment in part and denied in part. The District of Columbia prevailed on Holloway's Fifth Amendment due process claim, but Holloway survived summary judgment on part of his FMLA interference claim, with the matter proceeding to trial on whether the employer interfered with his FMLA leave rights.

What This Ruling Means

**Holloway v. District of Columbia Government** This case involved an employment dispute between a worker named Holloway and the District of Columbia Government. While the specific details of Holloway's complaint are not provided in the available information, this was an employment law case filed in December 2013. **The Court's Decision** The court dismissed Holloway's case, meaning the judge threw out the lawsuit without ruling in the worker's favor. No damages were awarded to Holloway, indicating that either the court found no wrongdoing by the government employer or determined that Holloway's case lacked sufficient legal merit to proceed. **What This Means for Workers** While the dismissal represents a loss for this particular employee, the case serves as a reminder that employment law cases against government employers can be challenging. Workers considering legal action against their employers should understand that not all workplace disputes will result in successful lawsuits. The dismissal could have occurred for various reasons, such as missing deadlines, insufficient evidence, or failure to meet specific legal requirements. Workers facing employment issues should consult with employment attorneys early to understand their rights and the strength of potential claims before pursuing litigation.

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.