Glen McDANIEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KINDRED HOSPITAL, INC., dba Kindred Hospital, Defendant-Appellee, 311 F. App'x 758

COOK, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff-appellant Glen McDaniel appeals the decision of the district court to enter

summary judgment for defendant-appellee Kindred Healthcare, Inc. McDaniel sued Kindred Healthcare, Inc. under Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). On appeal, McDaniel does not press his ADEA claim and does not challenge the district court’s determination that the statute of limitations bars some of his Title VII claims.

As for the claim he does appeal, our review of the record, the applicable law, and the parties’ briefs convinces us that the district court judge’s memorandum opinion carefully and correctly set out the facts and the governing law, and because a full opinion from this court would be duplicative and serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the grant of

summary judgment to defendant-appellee, adopting the reasoning of the district court’s February 26, 2008 memorandum resolving McDaniel’s timely Title VII claims. We reject McDaniel’s argument, drawn from a law review

article written by Professor Suja A. Thomas, Why

Summary Judgment is Unconstitutional, 93 VA. L. REV. 139 (2007), that

summary judgment violates the Seventh Amendment. This argument lacks merit. We agree with a prior panel of this court that recently examined the same law review

article and rejected the same argument: Although the historical examination that Professor Thomas provides is interesting .... [t]he Supreme Court has held that

summary judgment is constitutional, see Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore, 439 U.S. 322, 336, 99 S.Ct. 645, 58 L.Ed.2d 552, (1979) (citing Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. United States, 187 U.S. 315, 319-21, 23 S.Ct. 120, 47 L.Ed. 194 [(1902)], for support of the proposition that

summary judgment does not violate the Seventh Amendment), and it has continued to apply the Rule 56

summary judgment standard. See, e.g., Beard v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521, 126 S.Ct. 2572, 165 L.Ed.2d 697 (2006). Thus, it would be inappropriate for us to hold that the

summary judgment standard is unconstitutional. Cook v. McPherson, 273 Fed.Appx. 421, 425 (6th Cir.2008). Affirmed.