Legal Opinion
Sendall v. Boeing Helicopters
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided July 16, 1993No. Civ. A. No. 92-4789PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
ROBRENO, District Judge.
Plaintiff voluntarily retired from the employment of defendant at age 62 after approximately twenty-nine years of service. Two years after his retirement, he brought this action alleging age discrimination. Defendant has counterclaimed, charging that plaintiff disclosed defendant’s proprietary information, appropriated trade secrets, and generally breached his duty of loyalty to defendant.
Defendant has moved for summary judgment on plaintiffs claims and for partial summary judgment on count one of its counterclaim. For the reasons set forth below, summary…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- 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
- Delaware State College v. RicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Bazemore v. FridaySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Mellon Bank, N.A. v. Aetna Business Credit, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Sendall (Herbert G.) v. Boeing Helicopter, a Division of Boeing CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994