Kris-Way Truck Leasing, Inc. v. Kevin Capalbo - Memorandum Decision and Order on Motion for Summary Judgment

Sep 14, 2026

Memorandum Decision and Order in the United States District Court for the District of Maine addressing cross-statements for summary judgment. The court evaluates the standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and the district’s Local Rule 56 requirements on how parties must present numbered material facts with record citations. It also frames the dispute over whistleblower retaliation claims under the Maine Whistleblowers’ Protection Act and retaliation restrictions under the Surface Transportation Assistance Act, resolving the motion partly in plaintiff’s favor and partly against it.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryLetters

FormatPDF

Pages40

Reading Time14 min

AccessFree to download

Applicable Legal Standards

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56

Local Rule 56

Factual Background

Case 2:10-cv-00348-JHR Document 45 Filed 10/28/11 Page 1 of 40 PageID \#: 713 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE KEVIN CAPALBO, Plaintiff v. KRIS-WAY TRUCK LEASING, INC., Defendant )) )) )) )) ) No. 2:10-cv-348-JHR MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT1 Defendant Kris-Way Truck Leasing, Inc. (“Kris-Way”) moves for summary judgment as to all of plaintiff Kevin Capalbo’s claims of whistleblower retaliation in violation of the Maine Whistleblowers’ Protection Act (“MWPA”), 26 M.R.S.A. §§ 831-40, and the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (“STAA”), 49 U.S.C. § 31105. See Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (“Motion”) (Docket No. 21) at 1-2; Complaint (Docket No. 1) . For the reasons that follow, I grant the Motion in part and deny it in part. I. Applicable Legal Standards A. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 Summary judgment is appropriate “if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a); Santoni v. Potter, 369 F.3d 594, 598 (1st Cir. 2004) . “A dispute is genuine if the evidence about the fact is such that a reasonable jury could resolve the point in the favor of the nonmoving party.” Rodríguez-Rivera v. Federico Trilla Reg’l Hosp. of Carolina, 532 F.3d 28, 30 (1st Cir. 2008) (quoting Thompson v. Coca-Cola Co., 522 F.3d 168, 175 (1st Cir. 2008)) . “A fact 1 Pursuant to 28 U. S.C. § 636(c), the parties have consented to have me conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, and to order the entry of judgment. Case 2:10-cv-00348-JHR Document 45 Filed 10/28/11 Page 2 of 40 PageID \#: 714 is material if it has the potential of determining the outcome of the litigation.” Id. (quoting Maymi v. P.R. Ports Auth., 515 F.3d 20, 25 (1st Cir. 2008)) . The party moving for summary judgment must demonstrate an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party’s case. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 325 (1986) . In determining whether this burden is met, the court must view the record in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and give that party the benefit of all reasonable inferences in its favor. Santoni, 369 F.3d at 598. Once the moving party has made a preliminary showing that no genuine issue of material fact exists, the nonmovant must “produce specific facts, in suitable evidentiary form, to establish the presence of a trialworthy issue.” Triangle Trading Co. v. Robroy Indus., Inc., 200 F.3d 1, 2 (1st Cir. 1999) (citation and internal punctuation omitted); Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c) . “As to any essential factual element of its claim on which the nonmovant would bear the burden of proof at trial, its failure to come forward with sufficient evidence to generate a trialworthy issue warrants summary judgment to the moving party.” In re Spigel, 260 F.3d 27, 31 (1st Cir. 2001) (citation and internal punctuation omitted) . B. Local Rule 56 The evidence that the court may consider in deciding whether genuine issues of material fact exist for purposes of summary judgment is circumscribed by the local rules of this district. See Loc. R. 56. The moving party must first file a statement of material facts that it claims are not in dispute. See Loc. R. 56(b) . Each fact must be set forth in a numbered paragraph and supported by a specific record citation. See id. The nonmoving party must then submit a responsive “separate, short, and concise” statement of material facts in which it must “admit, deny or qualify the facts by reference to each numbered paragraph of the moving party’s statement of material facts[.]” Loc. R. 56(c) . The nonmovant likewise must support each denial Case 2:10-cv-00348-JHR Document 45 Filed 10/28/11 Page 3 of 40 PageID \#: 715 or qualification with an appropriate record citation. See id. The nonmoving party may also submit its own additional statement of material facts that it contends are not in di

FAQs

What legal standard governs summary judgment in this decision?

The court applies Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, requiring no genuine dispute of any material fact and entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.

What do Local Rule 56 procedures require from the parties?

The moving party must file a numbered statement of material facts with record citations, and the nonmoving party must file a separate short and concise response admitting, denying, or qualifying each numbered fact with supporting citations.

What claims and statutes are at issue in the motion for summary judgment?

The motion concerns whistleblower retaliation claims under the Maine Whistleblowers’ Protection Act and the Surface Transportation Assistance Act.

Sep 14, 2026

Uploaded by Valentina