Legal Opinion
Anderson v. Hunter, Keith, Marshall & Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided January 8, 1988No. C1-86-1039, C8-86-1619PublishedCited by 110 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KELLEY, Justice.
In bringing this action claiming a wrongful discharge against her former employer Hunter, Keith, Marshall & Co., Inc. (HKM), LaVonne Anderson (Anderson) alleges that the termination of her employment with the company was the result of its discrimination against her on the basis of her sex, marital status, and pregnancy in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act (Minn. Stat. § 363.03, subd. l(2)(b), (2)(c), (5) (1986)). The trial court found unlawful discrimination, awarded damages, awarded Anderson her attorney fees, and enjoined HKM from discriminating against…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. DoyleSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Furnco Construction Corp. v. WatersSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by110 opinions
- Steven G. Rothmeier v. Investment Advisers, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation Noel P. Rahn, an IndividualCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1996
- SCSC Corp. v. Allied Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- Robert E. Erickson v. Farmland Industries, Inc., a Missouri CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2001
- Hoover v. Norwest Private Mortgage BankingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- Thomas O. Yates v. Rexton, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2001
105 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.