Legal Opinion

Wentz v. Industrial Automation

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 29, 1992No. 60816, 60830PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PUDLOWSKI, Judge.

Plaintiff-appellant, Dorothy Wentz, appeals, claiming the trial court’s judgment awarding her $10,000 in damages and $15,-000 in attorney’s fees in her handicap discrimination suit is inadequate. Appellant argues, in the alternative, that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to grant appellant a new trial on the issue of damages. Respondent, Industrial Automation, Inc. (Automation), cross appeals claiming the award of attorney’s fees and damages excessive. Additionally, respondent contends the verdict directing instruction used at trial misstated the law.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Price Waterhouse v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Hewitt v. HelmsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. 50 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1099, 51 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 39,295 Marcel Verbraeken, Cross-Appellant v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1989
  4. Holsey v. Armour & Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1984
  5. Mary Juanita Sellers v. Delgado CollegeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1990

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. George L. Gipson v. Kas Snacktime CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1996
  2. State Ex Rel. Diehl v. O'MALLEYSupreme Court of Missouri · 2003
  3. Pollock v. Wetterau Food Distribution GroupMissouri Court of Appeals · 1999
  4. Cook v. Atoma International of America, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1996
  5. Gutknecht v. Smithkline Beecham Clinical Laboratories, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1996

11 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