Legal Opinion

Frymire v. Ampex Corp.

District Court, D. Colorado

Decided January 7, 1994No. Civ. A. 91-S-1858PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

SPARR, District Judge.

THIS MATTER came on for trial before the Court on May 25, 1993. The Plaintiffs assert a claim under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act [hereafter the WARN Act], 29 U.S.C. § 2101 et seq. The WARN Act is designed (among other things) to provide workers with prior notice of plant closings or relocations so that the workers may be able to plan their employment future accordingly. It provides protection to workers, their families, and communities by requiring employers to provide notification sixty calendar days in advance of plant closings and mass…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Carpenters District Council v. Dillard Department Stores, Inc.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1991
  2. Frymire v. Ampex Corp.District Court, D. Colorado · 1993
  3. United Mine Workers International, District 28 v. Harman Mining Corp.District Court, W.D. Virginia · 1991

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Frymire v. Ampex Corp.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995
  2. Snider v. Commercial Financial Services, Inc.District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 2002
  3. Frymire v. Ampex CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996
  4. Frymire v. Ampex Corp.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API