Legal Opinion
Caruso v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 28, 1989No. 86 Civ. 3408 (JMW)PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
WALKER, District Judge:
Plaintiff Conrad S. Caruso (“Caruso”), formerly a principal employed by defendant Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co. (“PMM”), alleges that defendant violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”), as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 et seq., which makes it unlawful for an employer to discriminate against an “employee” on the basis of age. Id. at § 623(a)(1). By Memorandum and Order dated July 31, 1987, the Court denied PMM’s prior motion for summary judgment. PMM now moves for partial summary judgment, alleging that newly-discovered facts…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. General Electric Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Bellis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Marilyn Wheeler v. Main HurdmanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1987
- Schwabenbauer v. Board of EducationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Strother v. Southern California Permanente Medical GroupCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- Ehrlich v. HoweDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1994
- Zygmuntowicz v. Hospitality Investments, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1993
- Caruso v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1991
- Simpson v. Ernst & YoungDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1994
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.