Legal Opinion
Kamens v. Summit Stainless, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 29, 1984No. Civ. A. 83-3644PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
KELLY, District Judge.
This is an action brought against defendant Summit Stainless, Inc. (“Summit”) and its parent corporation Sumitomo Corporation of America (“Sumitomo”) by two former employees of Summit, Ruth Kamens (“Kamens”) and Pearl Shander (“Shander”). Plaintiffs allege the following: 1) they were discharged on account of their age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (Count I); 2) they are owed overtime compensation pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. (Count II); 3) their…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Mortensen v. First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1977
- Holmberg v. ArmbrechtSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Cannon Manufacturing Co. v. Cudahy Packing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Geary v. United States Steel Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Iglesias-Mendoza v. La Belle Farm, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2007
- Ramirez v. RifkinDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2008
- Ayala v. Tito Contractors, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- Lapinad v. Pacific Oldsmobile-GMC, Inc.District Court, D. Hawaii · 1988
- Henchy v. City of AbseconDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2001
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.