Legal Opinion
McKinney v. Eastman Kodak Co.
District Court, W.D. New York
Decided August 25, 1997No. 6:96-cv-06493PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ORDER
LARIMER, Chief Judge.
Plaintiff, Barbara M. McKinney, commenced this action by filing a pro se complaint on October 29, 1996. Using a form complaint for civil rights claims, plaintiff typed an “X” on the line stating that the action was brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. She did not check the line for claims brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. However, where the form stated, “Defendant’s conduct is discriminatory with respect to which of the following (check all that apply),’’…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- United Air Lines, Inc. v. EvansSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Geneva Butts v. The City of New York Department of Housing Preservation and DevelopmentCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- KAREN VAN ZANT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KLM ROYAL DUTCH AIRLINES; And Kenneth Hasan King, Defendants-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996
- Lightfoot v. Union Carbide Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Shell v. BrzezniakDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2005
- Cooper v. Xerox Corp.District Court, W.D. New York · 1998
- Warshun v. New York Community Bancorp, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2013
- Blanke v. Rochester Telephone Corp.District Court, W.D. New York · 1999
- Cavallaro v. Corning Inc.District Court, W.D. New York · 2000
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.