Legal Opinion

Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided August 23, 2004No. 02-7378, 02-7474PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

POOLER, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiffs are all former employees of defendant Knolls Atomic Power Laboratories (“KAPL”) who lost their jobs in the course of an involuntary reduction in force (“IRIF”). As all of the plaintiffs are over forty, they are protected under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). See 29 Ü.S.C. § 631(a). They sued KAPL, its president, John Freeh, and its parent company, Lockheed Martin Corporation, alleging age discrimination under both federal and state law. In particular, they claimed that KAPL designed and implemented its workforce reduction process to…

2Cases cited41 opinions

  1. Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
  2. Hazen Paper Co. v. BigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  3. Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & TrustSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  4. Wards Cove Packing Co. v. AtonioSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. Joyce Bickerstaff v. Vassar CollegeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power LaboratorySupreme Court of the United States · 2008
  2. Patino v. Birken Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2012
  3. Duarte v. St. Barnabas Hosp.District Court, S.D. Illinois · 2018
  4. Zakre v. Norddeutsche Landesbank GirozentraleDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2008
  5. Elementis Chemicals Inc. v. T H Agriculture & Nutrition, L.L.C.District Court, S.D. New York · 2005

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

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API