Legal Opinion
Neal v. Honeywell, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided July 9, 1993No. 93 C 1143PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
PLUNKETT, District Judge.
This matter is before us on the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. For the reasons stated below, the motion is denied.
Facts
Plaintiff Judith Neal alleges that in February 1987 she discovered that her employer, Honeywell, was falsifying ballistics test data and delivering defective ammunition to the United States Army. When she discovered this conduct, she reported it to her superiors pursuant to internal Honeywell procedures. (Compl. ¶¶8, 15, 17, 19.) Honeywell responded by notifying the government and conducting an internal…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination UnitSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Emil J. Bartholet v. Reishauer A.G. (Zurich) and Reishauer Corporation (Elgin)Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992
- Marie Ellsworth & Paul Ellsworth v. City of Racine, a Municipal CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- Andrew Powe v. The City of ChicagoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981
- National Labor Relations Board v. ScrivenerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Robertson v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994
- Judith A. Neal v. Honeywell Inc. And Alliant Techsystems Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
- Clemes v. Del Norte County Unified School DistrictDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1994
- US Ex Rel. Kent v. AielloDistrict Court, E.D. California · 1993
- Fobbs v. Holy Cross Health System Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.