Legal Opinion

Greyson v. McKenna & Cuneo

District Court, D. Colorado

Decided March 20, 1995No. Civ. A. 93-K-1733 and 94-K-1338PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDERS

KANE, Senior District Judge.

These actions arise out of Plaintiff Grey-son’s termination from her legal secretary position with Defendant McKenna & Cuneo, a termination which Greyson alleges violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634 (1988 & Supp. V 1993). McKenna & Cuneo asserts no evidence of age discrimination exists, and moves for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In the separate but related action, (Greyson v. EEOC), Defendant EEOC seeks summary judgment in Greyson’s suit to procure…

2Cases cited13 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
National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
Hazen Paper Co. v. BigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1993

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

Information Network for Responsible Mining ("INFORM") v. Bureau of Land ManagementDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 2009