Legal Opinion
Crocker v. Piedmont Aviation, Inc.
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided August 3, 1988No. Civ. A. 86-1673(RCL)PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
LAMBERTH, District Judge.
Plaintiff Hobart N. Crocker, Jr. claims he had a right of first hire as a “protected employee” under section 43 of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, and that defendant Piedmont’s refusal to hire him gives rise to this cause of action. He seeks reinstatement and back pay. Piedmont moves for summary judgment, while Crocker moves for partial summary judgment that he is a protected employee under the Act.
FACTS
Plaintiff Crocker was employed as a pilot by Air New England from 1973 until it ceased operations on October 31, 1981, an apparent…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Wilson v. GarciaSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- DelCostello v. International Brotherhood of TeamstersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Agency Holding Corp. v. Malley-Duff & Associates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
- International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America v. Hoosier Cardinal Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1966
- United Parcel Service, Inc. v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Hobart N. Crocker, Jr. v. Piedmont Aviation, Inc., Hobart N. Crocker, Jr. v. Piedmont Aviation, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1995
- Bowdry v. United Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995
- Bowdry v. United Air Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- Long v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1990
- Robinson v. American Airlines, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 1989
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.