Legal Opinion
Napoleon v. Xerox Corp.
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided October 6, 1987No. Civ. A. N-85-526 (RCZ)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
ZAMPANO, Senior District Judge.
The plaintiff initially commenced this action pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (§ 1981), 1 and state tort law, alleging that the defendant, Xerox Corporation, unlawfully discriminated against him in their employer-employee relationship. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c), the defendant moved for partial judgment on the pleadings, claiming: 1) that plaintiff could not seek relief under both Title VII and § 1981 on the same facts, and therefore his § 1981…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Wilson v. GarciaSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Chevron Oil Co. v. HusonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Goodman v. Lukens Steel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Solem v. StumesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Assegai v. Bloomfield Board of EducationDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2004
- Hall v. South Central Connecticut Regional Water AuthorityDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1998