Legal Opinion
Scott v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided October 17, 2005No. CV 04-1186-ASPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
ASHMANSKAS, United States Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff Ray Scott (“Scott”) alleges that his employer, defendant Sears, Roebuck and Co. (“Defendant”), discriminated against him because of his age in violation of the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634 et seg.Xthe “ADEA”), as well as the comparable state statute, and ultimately terminated him for complaining about such discrimination and applying for workers’ compensation benefits. He also alleges claims for common-law wrongful discharge and intentional infliction of emotional distress.…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Johnson v. KillmerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2006
- Duke v. F.M.K. Construction Services, Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2010
- Shaw v. R.U. One Corp.District Court, D. Oregon · 2011
- Trees v. Service Employees International Union Local 503District Court, D. Oregon · 2025