Legal Opinion

Mead Johnson and Co. v. Oppenheimer

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided January 16, 1984No. 1-883A264PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NEAL, Presiding Judge.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

This is an interlocutory appeal from an order of the Gibson Cireuit Court denying defendant-appellant, Mead Johnson and Company's (Mead Johnson), motion for summary judgment in an action brought by plaintiff-appellee, John Oppenheimer (Oppenheimer), who sought to recover damages for his discharge from employment.

We reverse.

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

From 1972 through 1981 Oppenheimer was employed by Mead Johnson at its Evansville location, and his employment was at will or for an indefinite period of time. On November 19, 1981, Oppenheimer deliberately…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Frampton v. Central Indiana Gas CompanyIndiana Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Martin v. PlattIndiana Court of Appeals · 1979
  3. Campbell v. Eli Lilly & Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1980
  4. Pepsi-Cola General Bottlers, Inc. v. WoodsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1982
  5. Shaw v. SS Kresge CompanyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1975

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Hoffman-La Roche, Inc. v. CampbellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1987
  2. Orr v. Westminster Village North, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Scott Buethe v. Britt Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
  4. Hamblen v. Danners, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1985
  5. Lafary v. LafaryIndiana Court of Appeals · 1985

33 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