Legal Opinion
Martens v. Smith Barney, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided December 24, 2002No. 96 CIV. 3779(JGK)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
KOELTL, District Judge.
The plaintiffs, Pamela K. Martens (“Martens”) and Judith P. Mione (“Mione”) (collectively “the plaintiffs”), are among the named plaintiffs in this employment discrimination class action against Smith Barney, Inc. (“Smith Barney”) and two of its officers, including James Dimon (“Dimon”). The plaintiffs allege violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., as well as additional federal and New York State laws. Martens and Mione now move pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) for an order certifying for interlocutory appeal…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Coopers & Lybrand v. LivesaySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Green Tree Financial Corp.-Alabama v. RandolphSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Susan A. Desiderio v. National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
- In Re Holly Flor and Rudolph Mangels, Debtors. Holly Flor and Rudolph Mangels, Debtors-Appellants v. Bot Financial Corp., Creditor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996
- Martens v. ThomannCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Phillips Ex Rel. Green v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
- Ryan, Beck & Co., LLC v. FakihDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2003
- Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Tufamerica, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2023
- Dill v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.District Court, S.D. New York · 2021
- In Re: The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2020