MARTIN v. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITYMARTIN v. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
AND NOW, this 31st day of August 2026, upon considering the Defendants’ Motions for summary judgment (ECF 63, 64), Plaintiff‘s Oppositions (ECF 74, 75), Defendants’ Replies (ECF 82, 83), and for reasons in a forthcoming accompanying Memorandum detailing Plaintiff demonstrated genuine issues of material fact as to her claim against SEPTA for not providing her reasonable accommodation after being cleared to return to work but otherwise not adducing evidence allowing us to find a genuine issue of material of facts as to her remaining claims, it is ORDERED we:
- GRANT Local 234‘s Motion for summary judgment (ECF 64) DISMISSING it from this case and amending the caption as above; and,
- GRANT in part SEPTA‘s Motion for summary judgment (ECF 63) finding Plaintiff has adduced facts through discovery allowing us to find genuine issues of material facts as to Defendant SEPTA‘s efforts to reasonably accommodate Plaintiff‘s known disability upon her return to work but otherwise dismissing her remaining claims for race discrimination, retaliation, and contract claims.
KEARNEY, J.