Legal Opinion

Pennington v. Fluor Corp.

District Court, D. South Carolina

Decided May 30, 2018No. Civil Action No.: 0:17–cv–02094–JMCPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

J. Michelle Childs, United States District Judge

Plaintiffs Harry Pennington III and Timothy Lorentz (together "Plaintiffs") filed this putative class action against Fluor Corporation, Fluor Enterprises, Inc., Fluor Daniel Maintenance Services, Inc. ("Fluor Daniel"), SCANA Corporation ("SCANA") and South Carolina Electric & Gas Company ("SCE & G") (collectively "Defendants") alleging that the termination of their employment on July 31, 2017, was in violation of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 2101 - 2109 (the "WARN Act").1 (ECF No. 41.)

This matter is before…

2Cases cited15 opinions

Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
Republican Party of North Carolina v. MartinCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1992
Francis v. GiacomelliCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2009

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

3Cited by1 opinion

Peel v. Retiree Health Program for FujiFilm Manufacturing USA IncDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2021