Legal Opinion
O'NEILL v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided July 28, 2000No. Civ.A. 97-3767Published
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HART, United States Magistrate Judge.
On January 25, 2000, after a five day trial, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff in this age discrimination suit and awarded the plaintiff $519,068 in damages. 1 Presently before the court is the defendant’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law or in the Alternative New Trial or in the Alternative Remittitur. For the reasons that follow, the defendant’s motion will be Denied.
I. Facts
The plaintiff worked as a technician for Sears, repairing appliances in customers’ homes, for 22 years before his termination in 1996.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Price Waterhouse v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Hazen Paper Co. v. BigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Michael Meyers, Individually and as Representative of a Class v. Pennypack Woods Home Ownership Association and Marion A. SteinbronnCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1977
- Armbruster v. Unisys Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.