Legal Opinion
Hedum v. Starbucks Corp.
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided February 7, 2008No. CV 07-0024-MOPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
MOSMAN, District Judge.
Plaintiff Alicia Hedum brings this employment action against her former employer, Starbucks Corporation (“Starbucks”), for religious discrimination, retaliation, workers’ compensation discrimination, and wrongful discharge. Ms. Hedum, a member of the Wiccan religion, claims Starbucks subjected her to discriminatory treatment and terminated her employment because of (1) her religious practices, (2) her resistance to Starbucks’s discriminatory practices, and (3) her invocation of the workers’ compensation system. Starbucks claims Ms. Hedum was fired…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme 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
- Reloynne K. Villiarimo Joseph Harvest v. Aloha Island Air, Inc., Dba Island Air Rosie Nenezich Richard HeeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Neighorn v. Quest Health CareDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2012
- Rinallo v. CAPSA Solutions, LLCDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2016
- Aziz Aityahia v. Envoy Air Incorporated, et al.District Court, D. Arizona · 2026
- Hailey v. Legacy HealthDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2024
- Lavelle-Hayden v. Legacy HealthDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2024
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.