Legal Opinion

Welcker v. Smithkline Beckman

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided September 11, 1990No. Civ. A. 89-0866PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

VANARTSDALEN, Senior District Judge.

Presently before the court are the motions of defendant, Smithkline Beckman (Smithkline), for partial summary judgment, to strike plaintiffs jury demand, and to bifurcate trial. After due consideration of the memoranda filed by both parties, I will deny all the motions except the motion for partial summary judgment on compensatory damages, and the motion to strike plaintiff’s jury demand under Title VII, for the reasons explained below.

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff, Jean Welcker (Welcker), alleges that Smithkline discriminated against…

2Cases cited38 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Lorillard v. PonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. Curtis v. LoetherSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. Tull v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Rodin Properties-Shore Mall v. Cushman & Wakefield of Pennsylvania, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1999
  2. DiCentes v. MichaudSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1998
  3. Keck v. Commercial Union InsuranceDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1991
  4. Rush v. Scott Specialty Gases, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1996
  5. Jackson and Coker, Inc. v. LynamDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1993

5 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