Legal Opinion
Baker v. Consolidated Rail Corp.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided October 20, 1993No. Civ. A. 92-44JPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION and ORDER
BROOKS SMITH, District Judge.
I. Introduction
Plaintiff Charles J. Baker (“Baker”) alleges that he was constructively discharged from his job in defendant Consolidated Rail Corporation’s (“Conrail”) audiovisual department on the basis of his age, and subsequently replaced by a younger employee, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq., as amended, and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, 43 P.S. § 951 et seq. Plaintiff seeks damages consisting of estimated lost wages, future wages and retirement benefits. This matter is…
2Cases cited28 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
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- St. Mary's Honor Center v. HicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Sorgini v. Wissahickon School DistrictDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2017
- Embrico v. United States Steel Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007
- BAYLIS v. SCANTEK, INC.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2024
- Baker (Charles J.) v. Consolidated Rail CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- ORZECH v. MUHLENBERG TOWNSHIPDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2019