Legal Opinion
Phair v. New Page Corp.
District Court, D. Maine
Decided April 15, 2010No. 1:09-mj-00097PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
GEORGE Z. SINGAL, District Judge.
Plaintiff David Phair alleges that Defendants New Page Corporation and Rumford Paper Company terminated his employment in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) and the Maine Human Rights Act (“MHRA”). Before the Court are Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket # 23) and Defendants’ Motion to Exclude Evidence (Docket #25). As explained herein, the Court DENIES the Motions.
I. MOTION TO EXCLUDE EXPERT TESTIMONY
The Court will first address Defendants’ evidentiary motion as it affects the…
2Cases cited49 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
- Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2009
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Ayotte v. BarnhartDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2013
- Packgen v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc.District Court, D. Maine · 2013
- Rodríguez-Cruz v. Stewart Title Puerto Rico, Inc.District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2016
- Joyce v. Postmaster General, United States Postal ServiceDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2012
- Donahue v. Clair Car Connection, Inc.District Court, D. Maine · 2010
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.