Legal Opinion
Ruran v. Beth El Temple of West Hartford, Inc.
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided February 23, 2005No. Civ. No. 3:03CV452(CFD)(TPS)PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL AND FOR EXPENSES
SMITH, United States Magistrate Judge.
The plaintiff, David Ruran, commenced this action against the defendant, Beth El Temple of West Hartford, Inc. (“Beth El”), alleging age discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621-634 (2004) and the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act (“CFEPA”), Conn. Gen.Stat. § 46a-58 et seq. (Compl. UU 32-41). Pending before the court is the plaintiffs Motion to Compel and for Attorney’s Fees (Dkt. # 22). As explained below, the plaintiffs motion…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- United States v. Construction Products Research, Inc. Five Star Products, Inc. And H. Nash BabcockCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996
- Bowne of New York City, Inc. v. AmBase Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1993
- Wills v. Amerada Hess Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004
- Compagnie Francaise d'Assurance Pour le Commerce Exterieur v. Phillips Petroleum Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1984
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Mezu v. Morgan State UniversityDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2010
- Horace Mann Insurance v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2007
- Horace Mann Insurance v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2006
- Chamberlain v. Farmington Savings BankDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2007
- Conservation Law Foundation, Inc. v. Shell Oil CompanyDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2023
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.