Legal Opinion

Behm v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided October 7, 2005No. 00-222CPublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

WOLSKI, Judge.

The plaintiffs Michelle Behm, Frances Mulkey and Katherine Peterson2 have filed the instant action under the Equal Pay Act (“the Act”), 29 U.S.C. § 206(d) (2000), seeking the difference in pay between what male comparators received and what they have received for equal work.3 The defendant has moved for summary judgment under the affirmative defense that any pay disparities were due to a “factor other than sex.” Id. For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS the defendant’s motion.

I. BACKGROUND

The plaintiffs are all high-level managers for the FAA. Before…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  5. Vance v. BradleySupreme Court of the United States · 1979

31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. USfalcon, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010
  2. Cooke v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
  3. Moorehead v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
  4. Jordan v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
  5. Moorehead v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API