Legal Opinion
Mandy v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided September 26, 1996No. Civil 4-95-774PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING IN PART AND REJECTING IN PART REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
TUNHEIM, District Judge.
Plaintiff Gail Mandy was employed by defendant Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing (“3M”) as a laborer from approximately September 12, 1991 to November 1993. Mandy filed a complaint against 3M on August 3, 1995, alleging sex discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e, et seq. (“Title VII”) and the Minnesota Human Rights Act, Mnn.Stat. §§ 363.03, et seq. (“MHRA”) and claims of negligent training, retention, and…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Delaware State College v. RicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United Air Lines, Inc. v. EvansSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Susan Waltman v. International Paper Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1989
- Hubbard v. United Press International, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Tamrat Tademe v. Saint Cloud State UniversityCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2003
- Piper Jaffray Companies, Inc. v. Nat. Union Fire Ins. Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1997
- Sandra Smith v. Ashland, Inc., a Kentucky Corporation, Doing Business as Ashland Petroleum, Formerly Known as Ashland Oil & Refining CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2001
- Grozdanich v. Leisure Hills Health Center, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1998
- Smith v. DataCard Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1998
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.