Legal Opinion
Houser v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided October 10, 1980No. 79-4007PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TATE, Circuit Judge:
The plaintiff Houser brought this suit under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq., alleging that his employer, Sears, terminated him because of his age. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of Houser, awarding him damages of $37,271.30; however, the trial court subsequently granted Sears’ motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. This appeal followed.1 Based on our review of the record, we conclude that there was not substantial evidence to support the jury verdict, and we therefore affirm the trial court judgment.
Standard of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- The Boeing Company v. Daniel C. ShipmanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- James B. McCORSTIN, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- Marshall v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1977
- Price v. Maryland Casualty Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1977
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Wilbur L. LOVELACE, Appellant, v. SHERWIN-WILLIAMS COMPANY, AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1982
- Lusardi v. Xerox Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1987
- Judy Portis v. First National Bank of New Albany, MsCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1994
- Rayford C. PACE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY SYSTEM, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1983
- Frank Douglas v. Marvin Anderson, Raymond Hanson, Board of Directors, Hastings College of Law and Hastings Service Foundation, Inc., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.