Legal Opinion
GIEDGOWD v. CAFARO GROUP, LLC
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided October 26, 2021No. 2:20-cv-06184Unknown
1Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA THOMAS GIEDGOWD : CIVIL ACTION : v. : NO. 20-6184 : CAFARO GROUP, LLC : MEMORANDUM KEARNEY, J. October 26, 2021 The Pennsylvania General Assembly incentivizes lawyers to represent former employees who believe their relatively older age is a determinative or “but for” reason for their employer firing them. The attorneys agreeing to represent the former employees and who then win at trial are entitled to have the former employer pay their documented and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs after our review of the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Blum v. StensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- City of Burlington v. DagueSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Rode v. DellarcipreteCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
- Abrams v. Lightolier Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
- Martin O. Washington v. Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, Martin WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1996
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.