Chestnut v. WalMart

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
PARIS CHESTNUT, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 24-00317-KD-B
)
WALMART, )
)
Defendant. )
ORDER
After due and proper consideration of the issues raised, and a de novo determination of those
portions of the recommendation to which objection is made, the report and recommendation of the
United States Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and S.D. Ala. GenLR
72(a)(2)(S) and dated November 1, 2024, (Doc. 16), is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court.
It is ORDERED that Defendant’s partial motion to dismiss, (Doc. 6), is granted. Accordingly:
Count seven (ADA discriminatory discharge) is DISMISSED for failure to exhaust
administrative remedies. Counts five (Title VII retaliation) and nine (ADA retaliation) are
DISMISSED for failure to exhaust administrative remedies to the extent they are based on the
termination of Chestnut’s employment after she filed her EEOC charge of discrimination.
DONE and ORDERED this the 8th day of January 2025.
/s/ Kristi K. DuBose
KRISTI K. DuBOSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 1:24-cv-00317-KD-B Doc# 27 Filed 01/08/25 Page 1 of 1 PageID#
<pageID>