Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Keven Forth v. Kroger Company, 10-2465 (2012)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Number: 10-2465 Visitors: 8
Filed: Jun. 12, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 12a0609n.06 FILED No. 10-2465 Jun 12, 2012 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS LEONARD GREEN, Clerk FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT KEVEN A. FORTH, ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE Plaintiff-Appellant, ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT ) COURT FOR THE EASTERN v. ) DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN ) THE KROGER COMPANY, ) ) OPINION Defendant-Appellee. ) BEFORE: BOGGS, NORRIS, and KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. Plaintiff Keven Forth was terminated from his job as grocery manager at a
More
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 12a0609n.06 FILED No. 10-2465 Jun 12, 2012 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS LEONARD GREEN, Clerk FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT KEVEN A. FORTH, ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE Plaintiff-Appellant, ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT ) COURT FOR THE EASTERN v. ) DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN ) THE KROGER COMPANY, ) ) OPINION Defendant-Appellee. ) BEFORE: BOGGS, NORRIS, and KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. Plaintiff Keven Forth was terminated from his job as grocery manager at a Kroger store in Lake Orion, Michigan. He was fired for theft at the conclusion of a brief investigation into his purchase of marked-down meat and electronics from the store at which he worked. The propriety of Forth’s termination is not at issue here. Instead, Forth claims that Kroger defamed him by disseminating the basis of his termination to his former coworkers and the general public. The district court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, holding that plaintiff failed to specifically plead facts regarding Kroger’s publication of a defamatory statement, as required by Michigan law. On appeal, Forth claims that he presented sufficient specific evidence to support his claims for defamation and “compelled self-defamation.” We have reviewed the record on appeal and have carefully considered the arguments made by the parties in their briefs. Having done so, we conclude that the district court properly granted No. 10-2465 judgment to defendant and affirm based upon the reasoning set forth in its Order filed on October 5, 2010. The judgment of the district court is affirmed. -2-
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer