Legal Opinion
Mufti v. AARSAND & CO., INC.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided October 22, 2009No. C.A. 08-314PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MAURICE B. COHILL, JR., Senior District Judge.
Plaintiff Dana Mufti brings this suit against her former employer, defendant Aarsand & Company, Inc. (“Aarsand”), which owns several Taco Bell franchises, including the Taco Bell restaurant in Mon-roeville, Pennsylvania, where Mufti was briefly employed. She alleges that Aar-sand discriminated against her in her employment based on her race (Caucasian), in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (“PHRA”), 43 P.S. § 951 et seq. She alleges that she was…
2Cases cited37 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
- Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. MorganSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Boandl v. GeithnerDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2010
- AUSTIN v. GIANT FOOD STORESDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2020
- BLANGO v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIADistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2022
- Barlow v. Allenberry ResortDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2021
- Belles v. Wilkes-Barre Area School DistrictDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2020
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.