Legal Opinion
Yurasek v. Crossmark, Inc.
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided September 22, 2014No. Case No. 1:13cv150PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 23.)
SUSAN J. DLOTT, Chief Judge.
Plaintiff Joseph J. Yurasek, Jr., brings this action against his former employer, Defendant CROSSMARK, Inc. (“Cross-mark”), claiming age discrimination and retaliation in connection with his allegedly wrongful termination. Yurasek brings discrimination and retaliation claims under state and federal law. (Doc. 15, Amended Complaint.) Crossmark’s Motion for Summary Judgment is currently before the Court.
For the following reasons, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc.…
2Cases cited24 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
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ceglia v. Youngstown State Univ.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2015
- James Robinson v. CBRE, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2026