Legal Opinion
McCall v. Dynic USA Corp.
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided November 22, 1995No. C93-0334CV; CA A84907PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWarren, P. J.
Plaintiff appeals a summary judgment for defendants 1 in this employment discrimination case. She argues that the trial court erred in applying issue preclusion to the reason for her discharge from employment. We affirm.
Defendants are entitled to summary judgment if they have shown that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. ORCP 47 C. 2
According to the record on summary judgment, plaintiff worked for employer for approximately four and one-half years. In November 1992, plaintiff filed a workers’ compensation claim for an…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Nelson v. Emerald People's Utility DistrictOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Vaughn v. Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1980
- City of Portland v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1984
- Seitz v. State Ex Rel. Albina Human Resources Center & the Department of Human ResourcesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Thomas Dodd Doris Dodd v. Hood River County, and State of Oregon, Defendant-Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Hardie v. Legacy Health SystemCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
- Chapman v. Bond (In re Bond)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · 2016
- Marconi v. Guardian Management Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
- Krein v. Szewc (In re Szewc)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · 2017
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.