Funderburg v. Pine Bluff, City of, No. 5:2018cv00009 - Document 41 (E.D. Ark. 2019)
Court Description: JUDGMENT: Pursuant to the 40 Opinion and Order entered in this matter, the Court dismisses without prejudice plaintiff Jeremy Funderburg's illegal exaction claim; dismisses with prejudice Mr. Funderburg's discrimination and retaliation cl aims under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), and the Arkansas Civil Rights Act of 1993 (ACRA); and dismisses with prejudice Mr. Funderburg's claims under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The relief sought is denied. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 9/30/2019. (jbh)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION JEREMY FUNDERBURG v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 5:18-cv-00009 KGB CITY OF PINE BLUFF, ARKANSAS DEFENDANT JUDGMENT Pursuant to the Opinion and Order entered in this matter, the Court dismisses without prejudice plaintiff Jeremy Funderburg’s illegal exaction claim; dismisses with prejudice Mr. Funderburg’s discrimination and retaliation claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794 (“Rehabilitation Act”); and the Arkansas Civil Rights Act of 1993 (“ACRA”), codified at Ark. Code Ann. § 16-123-101, et seq.; and dismisses with prejudice Mr. Funderburg’s claims under the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. § 2601, et seq. The relief sought is denied. So adjudged this 30th day of September, 2019. _______________________________ Kristine G. Baker United States District Judge
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
