Legal Opinion
Pruett v. Krause Gentle Corp.
District Court, S.D. Iowa
Decided October 8, 2002No. 4:01-cv-40178PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
GRITZNER, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiffs, Dana Pruett (“Pruett”) and Mandy Wallace (‘Wallace”) filed their complaint on March 22, 2001, alleging that their former employer, Krause Gentle Corporation (“KGC”), terminated them because they were pregnant, in violation of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e)(k), and the Iowa CM Rights Act (ICRA), Iowa Code § 216.6(2)(a). On May 31, 2002, Defendant moved for summary judgment on all of Plaintiffs’ claims.
The motion…
2Cases cited33 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
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Smidt v. PorterSupreme Court of Iowa · 2005
- Rohloff v. Metz Baking Co., L.L.CDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 2007
- Deboom v. Raining Rose, Inc.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 2006