Legal Opinion
Klindt v. Honeywell International Inc.
District Court, D. Kansas
Decided February 19, 2004No. 02-4081-JARPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
ROBINSON, District Judge.
This case stems from plaintiff Cheri Klindt’s working relationship with defendant Honeywell International Inc. (“Honeywell”), and the termination of that relationship. Plaintiff claims that she experienced gender and age discrimination, pay disparity, and constructive discharge while employed at Honeywell. This matter is presently before the Court on Honeywell’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 96) on each of plaintiffs claims. As set forth in more detail below,…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Fulton v. Department of Social & Health ServicesCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012
- Mehus v. Emporia State UniversityDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2004
- Robinson v. City of Arkansas CityDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2012
- Aman Attieh v. University of Texas at Austin, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2005
- Aman Attieh v. University of Texas at Austin, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2005
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.