Legal Opinion
Bauman v. Jacobs Suchard, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided November 9, 1990No. 89 C 5452PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
HART, District Judge.
Plaintiffs claim defendant Jacobs Suchard, Inc., their former employer, discriminated against them because of their age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. Plaintiffs are members of an “opt-in class,” see 29 U.S.C. § 216(b),1 and are represented by retained attorneys. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) was granted leave to intervene as a plaintiff. The EEOC has not exercised its right under § 626(c)(1) to foreclose the individual actions of the employees. In a separate…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. United Shoe MacHinery CorporationDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1950
- United States v. Robert McPartlinCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1979
- Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. Kerr-McGee Corp.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1978
- Sedco International, S. A. v. CoryCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1982
- Leybold-Heraeus Technologies, Inc. v. Midwest Instrument Co.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1987
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Jackson Hospital Corporation v. National Labor Relations BoardDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009
- Mason C. Day Excavating, Inc. v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1992
- Schiller v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2007
- EEOC v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1996
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. International Profit Associates, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2002
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.