Legal Opinion
Ray v. Miller Meester Advertising, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided June 16, 2003No. C3-02-1605PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GORDON W. SHUMAKER, Judge.
The district court simultaneously conducted a bench trial on claims of gender discrimination brought under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA) and a jury trial on claims brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII). Both the district court and the jury concluded that appellant Miller Meester Advertising, Inc. (MMA) had engaged in unlawful gender discrimination when it terminated respondent Patricia Ludowese Ray’s employment and that Ray was entitled to damages under both acts.
On appeal, MMA alleges multiple errors in the district…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Hubbard v. United Press International, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Pollard v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- In Re the Welfare of the Children of J.B.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2005
- Ray v. Miller Meester Advertising, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- Cannon v. Minneapolis Police DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- Colenburg v. Starcon International, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2009
- State of Minnesota v. Quintin Lynn ThomasCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2016
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.