Legal Opinion
Monroe v. United Air Lines, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided June 30, 1981No. Nos. 79 C 360, 79 C 1572PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
SHADUR, District Judge.
Plaintiff airline pilots (in Higman) and flight engineers (in Monroe) have brought these consolidated actions challenging the mandatory retirement age of 60 established by United Air Lines, Inc. (“United”). Plaintiffs now seek (1) leave to send notice to the members of the class they represent, informing them of these actions and their right to “opt in,” and (2) an order requiring United to provide the names, addresses and dates of birth of all persons to whom notice should be sent. For the reasons stated in this memorandum opinion and order…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Bates v. State Bar of ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Bates v. State Bar of ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Gulf Oil Co. v. BernardSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Sperling v. Hoffman-La Roche, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1988
- Adams v. Inter-Con Security Systems, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2007
- Haynes v. Singer Co.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1983
- Allen v. Marshall Field & Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1982
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Chrysler Corp.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1982
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.