Legal Opinion
Michael D. Van Stan v. Fancy Colours & Company, Cross-Appellee
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided September 15, 1997No. 96-3604, 96-3684PublishedCited by 72 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HARLINGTON WOOD, JR., Circuit Judge.
After Fancy Colours & Company (“Fancy Colours”) terminated his employment, Michael D. Van Stan (“Van Stan”) sued Fancy Colours contending that it fired him in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and that Fancy Colours’ conduct in firing him amount ed to intentional infliction of emotional distress. A jury awarded Van Stan damages of $150,000 for intentional infliction of emotional distress but determined that Fancy Colours had not violated the ADA. After the court denied their respective posttrial motions,…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Donald C. Hedberg v. Indiana Bell Telephone Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1995
- McGrath v. FaheyIllinois Supreme Court · 1988
- Public Finance Corp. v. DavisIllinois Supreme Court · 1976
- Doe v. Calumet CityIllinois Supreme Court · 1994
- Harriston v. Chicago Tribune Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by72 opinions
- Larry Howell v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2021
- Hawkins v. PepsiCo, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2000
- Sally Naeem v. McKesson Drug Company and Dan MontreuilCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2006
- Fred Honaker v. Gary Smith, Mayor, Individually and as Mayor of the Village of Lovington and as Fire Chief of the Lovington Fire DepartmentCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2001
- Joella K. Wyninger v. New Venture Gear, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2004
67 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.