Case No: 05-3921 KERRY DENNISON v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, SCI-Mahoney

The Honorable Anne E. Thompson, Senior District Judge for the United States District*
Court for the District of New Jersey, sitting by designation.
NOT PRECEDENTIAL
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
Case No: 05-3921
KERRY DENNISON,
Appellant
v.
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, SCI-Mahoney;
MICHAEL R. YOURON; MARTIN L. DRAGOVICH;
THOMAS P. KOWALSKY; JAMES UNELL; ED KLEM
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
District Court No.: 01-CV-00056
District Judge: The Honorable James M. Munley
Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a)
March 30, 2006
Before: SMITH, and COWEN, Circuit Judges,
and THOMPSON, District Judge*
(Filed: April 6, 2006)
OPINION
Kerry Dennison, a former employee of the Pennsylvania Department of

-- 1 of 2 --

The District Court exercised jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. We have1
appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
2
Corrections, appeals from the order of the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Pennsylvania denying his motion for a new trial of his claims of retaliation in
violation of Title VII, the Free Speech and Petition clauses of the First Amendment to the
United States Constitution, the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, and the Pennsylvania
Whistle Blowers Act. The motion for a new trial alleged that the District Court erred by1
requiring his counsel to disclose an exhibit to the defense prior to Dennison’s closing
argument, and by limiting Dennison’s presentation of evidence in support of his claims.
We review these evidentiary rulings for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Sokolow,
91 F.3d 396, 402 (3d Cir. 1996). For the reasons explained by the District Judge in his
thorough memorandum, we will affirm the judgment of the District Court.

-- 2 of 2 --