Legal Opinion

Young v. Lukens Steel Co.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided November 22, 1994No. Civ. A. 92-6490PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

HUTTON, District Judge.

Presently before the Court are the defendants Lukens Steel Company and Lukens, Inc.’s (collectively “Lukens”) Motion For A New Trial, or In The Alternative, For A Judgment As A Matter Of Law, defendants’ Motion To Alter Or Amend Judgment, Or In The Alternative, Motion For Relief From Judgment, plaintiffs Motion To Mold The Verdict, plaintiffs Motion For Attorneys’ Fees, and opposition thereto.

I. BACKGROUND

In this action, Donald Young alleged, among other things, that Lukens terminated his employment because of his age, in violation of the Age…

2Cases cited40 opinions

  1. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. St. Mary's Honor Center v. HicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. Luis A. Fuentes v. Steven P. Perskie, Chairman of the New Jersey Casino Control Commission the New Jersey Casino Control CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
  5. Allied Chemical Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980

35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Becker v. ARCO Chemical Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1998
  2. O'NEILL v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2000
  3. Rush v. Scott Specialty Gases, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1996
  4. Mennen v. Easter StoresDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1997
  5. Jordan v. CCH, INC.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2002

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API