Legal Opinion
Rodriguez v. SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceutical, Puerto Rico, Inc.
District Court, D. Puerto Rico
Decided July 8, 1999No. Civil 98-1649(JP)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
PIERAS, Senior District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Before the Court are Defendant’s SB Pharmco Puerto Rico, Inc.’s (“SmithKline”) Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support thereof (docket No. 41), Plaintiffs Motion and Memorandum in Opposition thereto (docket No. 54), and SmithKline’s Reply to Plaintiffs Opposition. Plaintiff brought the Complaint in the above-captioned case claiming that her employer SmithKline, in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, and the Equal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C. § 206(d) (“EPA”), discriminated against her because of her sex.
Pla…
2Cases cited41 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
- St. Mary's Honor Center v. HicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hilda Rodriguez,plaintiffs v. Smithkline Beecham, Their Agents, Officers, Employees and Successors in InterestCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2000
- Maldonado-Cordero v. AT & TDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1999
- Acosta v. Harbor Holdings & Operations, Inc.District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2009
- Quintana-Dieppa v. Department of the ArmyDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2020
- Rodriguez v. Smithkline BeechamCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2000