Legal Opinion
Hamblin v. Alliant Techsystems, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided November 27, 2001No. C9-01-562PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DANIEL F. FOLEY, Judge. *
In this age discrimination case, appellant challenges the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of respondent, arguing that issues of material fact exist as to disparate treatment and disparate impact. We reverse as to disparate treatment, affirm as to disparate impact, and remand.
FACTS
Respondent Alliant Techsystems designs, manufactures, and sells defense-related products and services. Due to decreased military spending in the late 1980s, Honeywell, the predecessor corporation to Alliant, and then Alliant carried out a series of workforce…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & TrustSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Fabio v. BellomoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
- John D. Starceski, at No. 94-3208 v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, at No. 94-3182Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Rodd Wagner v. Gallup, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2015
- Hansen v. Robert Half International, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2011
- Kuklenski v. Medtronic USA, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2023
- Kuklenski v. Medtronic USA, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2023
- Nelson v. American Modern Insurance GroupDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2025
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.