Legal Opinion
Benefits Communication Corp. v. Klieforth
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided June 9, 1994No. 92-CV-996PublishedCited by 56 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KING, Associate Judge:
Appellee Laurette C. Klieforth (“employee”) filed a complaint against appellants Great West Life Assurance Co. (“Great *1300West”) and its subsidiary Benefits Communication Corporation (“BCC”), who was her employer, alleging appellants had denied her a promotion on the basis of her sex in violation of the District of Columbia Human Rights Act (“Human Rights Act”).1 Shortly after the Supreme Court’s decision in Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp.,2 which upheld an arbitration provision for an age discrimination claim, appellants moved to compel arbitration of Klieforth’s…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Griggs v. Duke Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Wards Cove Packing Co. v. AtonioSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by56 opinions
- Carney, Darion M. v. Amer UnivCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1998
- Austin v. Owens-Brockway Glass Container, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1996
- Wallace v. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & FlomDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
- Daka, Inc. v. BreinerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
- Estenos v. PAHO/WHO Federal Credit UnionDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2008
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.