Legal Opinion
Moorehead v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided September 3, 2009No. 07-654 CPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
GEORGE W. MILLER, Judge.
Plaintiff Paula R. Moorehead alleges that she was hired as a transportation security screener (“Screener”) at the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (“SeaTac”) by the Transportation Security Administration (“TSA”) at a lower starting salary than men hired for the same position in violation of the Equal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C. § 206(d)(1) (2006). After a two-day trial, the Court concludes that any pay disparities did not violate the Equal Pay Act.
I. Background1
Prior to September 11, 2001, all Screeners were employed by the private sector. In response to…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Corning Glass Works v. BrennanSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Cora Aldrich v. Randolph Central School District and Cattaraugus County Civil Service CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
- Karen Miranda v. B & B Cash Grocery Store, Inc., Karen Miranda v. B & B Cash Grocery Store, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1992
- Carol A. Timmer v. Michigan Department of Commerce and Michigan Department of Civil Service, United States of America, IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
- Fulvio Stanziale v. Lester Jargowsky, Public Health Coordinator County of Monmouth Monmouth County Board of HealthCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Santiago v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
- Jordan v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
- Brooks v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
- Fraser v. Mta Long Island Rail Rd.District Court, E.D. New York · 2018
- Boyer v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2022
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.