Legal Opinion
Bruder v. Moniz
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided July 2, 2014No. Civil Action No. 2011-1492PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JOHN D. BATES, United States District Judge
Plaintiff Arthur Perry Bruder, an attorney representing himself, brought this action against the Secretary of the United States Department of Energy (“DOE”), alleging age and gender discrimination. In an earlier opinion, this Court dismissed all but one count of Bruder’s complaint because of his failure to exhaust administrative remedies and to show adverse employment action. See July 17, 2013 Mem. Op. [ECF No. 23]. The only count remaining is Bruder’s claim that DOE discriminated against him by giving him a lower annual performance…
2Cases cited32 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
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Stoe v. SessionsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
- Davis v. PerdueDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2023
- Goble v. Lexisnexis Special Services, Inc.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2025
- Hoffman v. HooverDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2022
- Stoe v. LynchDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2018
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.