green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
12.1 score
“decisions which are made for reasons independent of age but which happen to correlate with age are not actionable under the adea”
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 33 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Whitworth v. Whitworth
(2×)
he icwa does not apply to 'child custody proceedings' pursuant to divorce proceedings.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Tucker v. Kingsbury Corp.
decisions which are made for reasons independent of age but which happen to correlate with age are not actionable under the adea
discussed
Cited "see"
Tammy Renee Whitworth v. Douglas Wayne Whitworth and Carol Whitworth
See Comanche Indian Tribe v. Hovis , 53 F.3d 298, 302 (10th Cir. 1995), cert. denied , 516 U.S. 916 , 116 S. Ct. 306 (1995) ("[T]he ICWA does not apply to 'child custody proceedings' pursuant to divorce proceedings."); DeMent v. Oglala Sioux Tribal Court , 874 F.2d 510 , 514 (8th Cir. 1989) (same). (24) The only proper factors for the trial court to consider in determining the best interest of K.C. are those applicable in a SAPCR attendant on divorce proceedings under the Texas Family Code, not factors applicable to cases for termination of parental rights and placement in foster care brought …
cited
Cited "see"
Campanaro v. Pennsylvania Electric Co.
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719 (3d Cir.1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 916 , 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kohn v. AT & T CORP.
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 916 , 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“[S]ummary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed ....”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985); Estate of Reddert v. United States, 925 F.Supp. 261, 265 (D.N.J.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Browning v. Rohm & Haas Tennessee, Inc.
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham, Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 732-34 (3d Cir.1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 916 , 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995) (strongly intimating that there is no disparate impact liability under the ADEA), Martincic v. Urban Redevelopment Auth. of Pittsburgh, 844 F.Supp. 1073, 1076-77 (W.D.Pa.), aff'd, 43 F.3d 1461 (3d Cir.1994) (holding that there is no disparate impact liability under ADEA); Gehring v. Case Corp., 43 F.3d 340, 342 (7th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1159 , 115 S.Ct. 2612 , 132 L.Ed.2d 855 (1995) (disparate impact theory of liability unavailable in Sev…
discussed
Cited "see"
Bellemead Development Corp. v. New Jersey State Council of Carpenters Benefit Funds
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 916 , 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985); Estate of Reddert v. United States, 925 F.Supp. 261, 265 (D.N.J.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Bellemead Dev. v. NJ COUNCIL, CARP. BEN. FUNDS
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 916 , 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) ("summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed"), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985); Estate of Reddert v. United States, 925 F.Supp. 261, 265 (D.N.J. 1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Edward A. Finney v. Greg Hildebrandt David Sperbeck Phillip Briggs
See Anderson v. County of Kern, 45 F.3d 1310, 1313-15 (9th Cir.), amended by 75 F.3d 448 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 306 (1995) 2 Because of our disposition of this appeal, we do not consider the applicability, if any, of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, Pub.L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Johnston v. Johnson
(2×)
See Anderson v. County of Kern, 45 F.3d 1310, 1313 (9th Cir.), amended, 75 F.3d 448 , cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 306 (1995).
examined
Cited "see"
Gossen Corp. v. Marley Mouldings, Inc.
(5×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See ABB Robotics, Inc. v. GMFanuc Robotics Corporation, 52 F.3d 1062, 1063 (Fed.Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 211 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
Lewis \Toby\" Tyler v. City of Manhattan
(2×)
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 731 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); Rhode Island v. Narragansett Indian Tribe, 19 F.3d 685 , 705 n. 22 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 919 , 115 S.Ct. 298 , 130 L.Ed.2d 211 (1994); Sanchez-Trujillo v. INS, 801 F.2d 1571 , 1581 n. 9 (9th Cir.1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Green v. City of Paterson
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed”), ce rt. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985); Estate of Reddert v. United States, 925 F.Supp. 261, 265 (D.N.J.1996).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Independent Serv. Organ. Antitrust Lit.
See ABB Robotics, Inc. v. GMFanuc Robotics Corp., 52 F.3d 1062, 1063 (Fed.Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 211 (1995); A.C.
cited
Cited "see"
CSU Holdings, Inc. v. Xerox Corp.
See ABB Robotics, Inc. v. GMFanuc Robotics Corp., 52 F.3d 1062, 1063 (Fed.Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 211 (1995); AC.
discussed
Cited "see"
Nubenco Enterprises, Inc. v. Inversiones Barberena, S.A.
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985) ; Estate of Reddert v. United States, 925 F.Supp. 261, 265 (D.N.J.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
DeJoy v. Comcast Cable Communications Inc.
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. ---, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985); Estate of Reddert v. United States, 925 F.Supp. 261, 265 (D.N.J.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Pokol v. EI Du Pont De Nemours and Co., Inc.
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985); Estate of Reddert v. United States, 925 F.Supp. 261, 265 (D.N.J.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Lee-Patterson v. New Jersey Transit Bus Operations, Inc.
See Di-Biase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985); Estate of Reddert v. United States, 925 F.Supp. 261, 265 (D.N.J.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Bayonne Board of Education v. R.S.
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. ---, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985); Estate of Reddert v. United States, 925 F.Supp. 261, 265 (D.N.J.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Jerry O. Smith v. City of Des Moines, Iowa
(2×)
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 732-34 (3d Cir.) (opinion of Greenberg, J., alone) (doubting disparate impact theory cognizable), cer t. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); Lyon v. Ohio Educ.
discussed
Cited "see"
Seidenberg v. Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985); Estate of Reddert, 925 F.Supp. 261, 265 (D.N.J.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Johnson v. Penske Truck Leasing Co.
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985); Estate of Reddert, 925 F.Supp. 261, 265 (D.N.J.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Jerry O. Smith v. City of Des Moines
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719 , 732- -5- 34 (3d Cir.) (opinion of Greenberg, J., alone) (doubting disparate impact theory cognizable), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 306 (1995); Lyon v. Ohio Educ.
discussed
Cited "see"
DeJoy v. Comcast Cable Communications Inc.
Id.; see DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719 , 724 n. 5 (3d Cir.) (relying on both ADEA and Title VII cases when addressing ADEA claim), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
Downey v. United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local 1262
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Finkelstein v. United States
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985); Estate of Reddert, 925 F.Supp. 261, 265 (D.N.J.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Raniero v. Antun
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985); Estate of Reddert v. United States, 925 F.Supp. 261, 265 (D.N.J.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Estate of Reddert v. United States
See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 724 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); see also Gans v. Mundy, 762 F.2d 338, 341 (3d Cir.) (“summary judgment is proper where the facts are undisputed”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 537 , 88 L.Ed.2d 467 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Henkin v. AT & T CORP.
See also DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 732-34 (3rd Cir.1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 916 , 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995) (opining disparate impact is not viable theory of liability under ADEA, but reserving ruling on issue until another day).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Catherine A. MARZANO, Appellant, v. COMPUTER SCIENCE CORP. INC.; CSC Partners Inc.
Rather, “it is sufficient to show that he was discharged, while the [employer] retained someone [outside the protected class].” Healy v. New York Life Insurance Co., 860 F.2d 1209 , 1214 n. 1 (3d Cir.1988), cert. denied, 490 U.S. 1098 , 109 S.Ct. 2449 , 104 L.Ed.2d 1004 (1989); see also DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719 , 723 n. 2 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); Torre, 42 F.3d at 831 ; *504 Armbruster, 32 F.3d at 777 ; Billet v. CIGNA Corp., 940 F.2d 812 , 816 n. 3 (3d Cir.1991); Duffy, 738 F.2d at 1396 n. 2; Massarsky, 706 F.2d a…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Marzano v. Computer Science
Rather, "it is sufficient to show that he was discharged, while the [employer] retained someone [outside the protected class]." Healy v. New York Life Insurance Co., 860 F.2d 1209 , 1214 n.1 (3d Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 490 U.S. 1098 (1989); see also DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719 , 723 n.2 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 306 (1995); Torre, 42 F.3d at 831 ; Armbruster, 32 F.3d at 777 ; Billet v. CIGNA Corp., 940 F.2d 812 , 816 n.3 (3d Cir. 1991); Duffy, 738 F.2d at 1395 n.2; Massarsky, 706 F.2d at 118 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sperling v. Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc.
(2×)
See also DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corporation, 48 F.3d 719, 734 (3d Cir.) (statement of Judge Green-berg) (stating that “the primary purpose of [the ADEA] is to prohibit employers from acting on the assumption that ‘productivity and competence decline with old age,’ ” (quoting Hazen Paper, 507 U.S. at 610 , 113 S.Ct. at 1706 )), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 306 , 133 L.Ed.2d 210 (1995); EEOC v. Francis W.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Comanche Indian Tribe of Oklahoma
v.
Hovis, Judge, District Court of Kiowa County, Oklahoma
v.
Hovis, Judge, District Court of Kiowa County, Oklahoma
No. 95-295.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 10, 1995.
Published
Citer courts: Court of Appeals of Texas (2) · D. New Hampshire (1)
C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.