Legal Opinion

Van Jelgerhuis v. Mercury Finance Co.

District Court, S.D. Indiana

Decided September 19, 1996No. IP 95-0275-C-B/SPublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ENTRY DISCUSSING PARTIAL GRANT OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT

BARKER, Chief Judge.

Plaintiffs, Kimberly Van Jelgerhuis (‘Van Jelgerhuis”), Janice Brooks (“Brooks”) and Kathy Page-Nowlin (“Nowlin”) have sued Defendants, Mercury Finance Company of Indiana, Inc. (“Mercury”) and their former supervisor, Jim Johnson (“Johnson”), for sexual harassment in the form of disparate impact, disparate treatment and hostile work environment claims, as well as for invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Defendants have moved for summary judgment. For the reasons discussed below, this motion…

2Cases cited86 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  4. Carnegie-Mellon University v. CohillSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  5. Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Loeffelholz v. University of WashingtonWashington Supreme Court · 2012
  2. KUNTZMAN v. Wal-MartDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 2009
  3. Miller v. Edward Jones & Co.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2005
  4. Schele v. Porter Memorial HospitalDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 2001
  5. Peck v. HUDSON CITY SCHOOL DIST., HUDSON, NYDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2000

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