U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 2011

Drake v. Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Decided April 4, 2011 · Gerard, Loretta, Lynch, Preska, Robert, Sack

417 F. App'x 84

Counsel

Richard W. Drake, Marshall, VA, pro se., Robert I. Steiner, Kelley Drye & Warren LLP, New York, NY, D. Faye Caldwell, Caldwell & Clinton P.L.L.C., Houston, TX, for Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings and Kevin Wilson., Thomas J. Mortati, Burke, Scolamiero, Mortati & Hurd, LLP, Albany, New York, for Northwest Toxicology, Incorporated and David J. Kuntz., Ira G. Rosenstein, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, New York, NY, for William H. Whaley and West Paces Ferry Medical Clinic; Diane K. Farrell, Devitt Spellman Barrett, LLP, Smithtown, NY, for Elsohly Laboratories, Incorporated.

Cases that cite this one

6 later published cases cite this decision.

Landon v. Kroll Laboratory Specialists, Inc. (N.Y. 2013)
Perrien v. City of New York (District Court, E.D. New York 2022)
The Glenn H. Curtiss Museum of Local History v. Confederate Motors, Inc. (District Court, W.D. New York 2021)
Fiduciary Network, LLC v. Hurley (District Court, S.D. New York 2020)
Drake v. Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings (Supreme Court of the United States 2012)
Landon v. Kroll Laboratory Specialists, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

Appellant Richard W. Drake, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s judgment granting the defendants’ motions for summary judgment and dismissing his complaint alleging that the defendants provided false drug test results to his employer. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and the procedural history of the case.

We review de novo a district court’s dismissal of a complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) for lack of personal jurisdiction, and the party asserting jurisdiction has the burden of demonstrating that it exists. See Robinson v. Overseas Military Sales Corp., 21 F.3d 502, 507 (2d Cir. 1994). We review orders granting summary judgment de novo to determine whether the district court properly concluded that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Miller v. Wolpoff & Abramson, L.L.P., 321 F.3d 292, 300 (2d Cir. 2003).

Having conducted an independent and de novo review, we find, for substantially the same reasons as the district court, that Drake failed to establish facts supporting the district court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over Defendants-Appellees Kevin Wilson, Elsohly Laboratories, Inc., William H. Whaley, and West Paces Ferry Medical Clinic. We further conclude, for substantially the same reasons as the district court, that Drake’s claims against Defendants-Appellees Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, Northwest Toxicology, Inc., and David J. Kuntz are barred by the statute of limitations.

We have considered Drake’s other arguments on appeal and, although we are fully aware of his sense of grievance, have found them to be without legal merit. We reject Drake’s invitation to reconsider our holding in Drake v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 147 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 1998). We may not disregard the decision of a prior panel, except in special circumstances not present here. See Union of Needletrades, Indus. & Textile Emps. v. INS, 336 F.3d 200, 210 (2d Cir. 2003). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.