Legal Opinion
Wiltz v. M/G Transport Services, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Kentucky
Decided April 25, 1996No. Civil Action 95-7PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
BERTELSMAN, Chief Judge.
This is an attempted class action brought on behalf of approximately 160 people who lost their jobs when defendant M/G Transport Services, Inc. (“M/G”) sold its river operation assets (“towboats”) to defendant Ingram Ohio Barge Company (“Ingram”). Plaintiffs allege that neither Ingram, M/G, nor M/G’s parent corporation, The Midland Company (“Midland”), notified the employees of the loss of their jobs within 60 days as required by the Workers Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (“WARN Act”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 2101-2109.
This case is currently…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- International Union, United Mine Workers, Hattie Mae Hilliard v. Jim Walter Resources, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1993
- Lee Salyer, Vernon Salyer, Jr., Danny Lee Collins, Leon D. Chapman v. Universal Concrete ProductsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991
- United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local Number 72 v. Giant Markets, Inc.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1995
- McClain v. Laurel Street Art Club, Inc.District Court, E.D. Kentucky · 1995
3Cited by3 opinions
- Teamsters Local Union 413 v. Driver's, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
- Wiltz v. M/G Transport Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
- Wiltz v. Transport Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997