Legal Opinion
Jordan v. Sprint Nextel Corp.
District Court, D. Kansas
Decided March 11, 2014No. Case No. 12-2573PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
ERIC F. MELGREN, District Judge.
Plaintiff Jack R. Jordan brings a retaliation claim under § 806 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”) (18 U.S.C. § 1514A) against Defendant Sprint Nextel *920Corporation, Inc. and Defendant Gary Foresee. He claims that Defendants constructively discharged him and retaliated against him in several other ways. Defendants seek dismissal of Plaintiffs lawsuit arguing that (1) the statute of limitations or statute of repose has run, (2) the doctrine of laches bars Plaintiffs claim, and (3) Plaintiff fails to adequately state a claim against…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Hall v. BellmonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- Zinermon v. BurchSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Servants of the Paraclete v. DoesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Jerry Peterson v. Laramie City CouncilWyoming Supreme Court · 2024
- Despain v. BNSF Railway Co.District Court, D. Arizona · 2016
- Gunderson v. BNSF Railway Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2014
- Kshetrapal v. Dish Network, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2015
- Wiest v. LynchDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.