Legal Opinion

Reichert v. Whirlpool Corporation

District Court, M.D. Tennessee

Decided October 2, 2020No. 3:18-cv-00001Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION GREGORY REICHERT, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) NO. 3:18-cv-00001 v. ) JUDGE RICHARDSON ) WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION, ) ) Defendants. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 49). Plaintiff responded, (Doc. No. 53), Defendant replied, (Doc. No. 55), and the motion is ripe for review. For the reasons discussed below, Defendant’s Motion will be GRANTED. BACKGROUND1 Plaintiff was an employee of Maytag Corporation which Whirlpool acquired shortly before Plaintiff’s…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Pittman v. Experian Info. Solutions, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2018
  3. Carolyn T. Rodgers v. Elizabeth BanksCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
  4. Cataldo v. United States Steel Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
  5. Heidi Hostettler v. College of WoosterCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2018

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API