Legal Opinion
Paul Schuster v. Lucent Technologies, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided April 28, 2003No. 01-3974PublishedCited by 139 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KANNE, Circuit Judge.
Paul Schuster brought this suit claiming that his employment with Lucent Technologies, Inc. (“Lucent”) was terminated because of his age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (2003). Lucent denied age was the motivation for the discharge, stating that Schuster was terminated as part of an effort to address adverse financial conditions and to eliminate overlapping management positions. Lucent moved for summary judgment, contending that Schuster had not raised an issue of material fact that Lucent’s proffered reasons for…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- 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
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Hazen Paper Co. v. BigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by139 opinions
- Willard L. Hemsworth, II v. quotesmith.com, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007
- Ryan Lord v. High Voltage Software, IncorpoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2016
- Faas v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2008
- Janine Rudin v. Lincoln Land Community CollegeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2005
- Brenda Dandy v. United Parcel Service, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2004
134 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.