Legal Opinion
Anderson v. Consolidated Rail Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided July 23, 2002No. 01-1518PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
ROSENN, Circuit Judge.
This age discrimination in employment case has its genesis in the lengthy struggle of our nation’s railroads for survival. Consolidated Railroad Corporation (Conrail), now defunct, engaged in a reduction-in-force (RIF) in July 1995 when it involuntarily terminated thirty employees in its Central Office. In November 1998, these employees, all but one in the forty to fifty-five year age range, sued Conrail in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. They claimed that Conrail’s decision to terminate them violated the Age…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Price Waterhouse v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Hare v. Postmaster GeneralCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007
- Whole Enchilada, Inc. v. Travelers Property Casualty Co. of AmericaDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2008
- Johnson v. McGraw-Hill CompaniesDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2006
- Grosso v. Federal Express Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2006
- Anderson v. Consolidated Rail Corporation ConrailCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2002
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.