How cited: Bartmess v. Drewrys · Go Syfert

Bartmess v. Drewrys (1971)

green · 105 citation events across 42 courts. Showing the 28 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1971 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
197119982026
Rule Authority · SCOTUS · 4 citations in this opinion
With reference to the statutory language, courts have reasoned that forced retirement is “tantamount to a discharge,” Bartmess v. Drewrys U. S. A., Inc., 444 F. 2d 1186, 1189 (CA7), cert. denied, 404 U. S. 939 (1971), or that the employer requiring retirement is “discriminating] against” the retired employee “with respect to . . . [a] condition ... of employment,” see Peters v. Missouri-Pacific R.
Rule Authority · 10th Cir.
Oklahoma Employment Security Commission, 642 F.2d 1199 , 1200 n. 2 (10th Cir.1981); Rich v. Martin Marietta Corp., 522 F.2d 333, 348 (10th Cir.1975); Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1188 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed.2d 252 (1971); Elliott v. Sperry Rand Corp., 79 F.R.D. 580, 585-86 (D.Minn.1978); see generally Furr v. A T & T Technologies, Inc., 824 F.2d 1537, 1543 (10th Cir.1987); Stewart v. CPC International, Inc., 679 F.…
Rule Authority · 10th Cir.
Oklahoma Employment Security Commission, 642 F.2d 1199 , 1200 n. 2 (10th Cir.1981); Rich v. Martin Marietta Corp., 522 F.2d 333, 348 (10th Cir.1975); Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1188 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed.2d 252 (1971); Elliott v. Sperry Rand Corp., 79 F.R.D. 580, 585-86 (D.Minn.1978); see generally Furr v. A T & T Technologies, Inc., 824 F.2d 1537, 1543 (10th Cir.1987); Stewart v. CPC International, Inc., 679 F.…
Rule Authority · 5th Cir.
For instances in which other circuits have recognized this action, see, e.g., EEOC v. Western Publishing Co. 502 F.2d 599 , 603 (8th Cir. 1974); Macklin v. Spector Freight Systems, 478 F.2d 979, 987 (D.C.App.1973); Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1188 (7th Cir.), cert. denied 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed.2d 252 (1971); Cox v. United States Gypsum Co., 409 F.2d 289, 290 (7th Cir. 1969). .
Rule Authority · 5th Cir.
Sec. 1611.7, governing the case of a client who, although originally eligible for legal services, subsequently becomes ineligible due to a change in his financial situation 6 For instances in which other circuits have recognized this action, see, e.g., EEOC v. Western Publishing Co. 502 F.2d 599 , 603 (8th Cir.1974); Macklin v. Spector Freight Systems, 478 F.2d 979, 987 (D.C.App.1973); Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1188 (7th Cir.), cert. denied 404 U.S. 93
Rule Authority · 7th Cir.
Plaintiff’s position is that the attendance bonus policy was a Title VII violation that continued until April 28, 1974, the date of plaintiff’s termination. 4 We agree with the district court’s finding that this was a continuing violation. 5 See Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., *1177 Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1188-89 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed.2d 252 (1971) (employer’s maintenance of allegedly discriminatory retirement plan held to be continuing vi…
Rule Authority · Cal. · 2 citations in this opinion
(Ibid.; see also E.E.O.C. v. Local 350, Plumbers and Pipefitters (9th Cir. 1992) 982 F.2d 1305, 1308 [policy of discriminating against retirees in hiring hall]; Abrams v. Baylor College of Medicine (5th Cir. 1986) 805 F.2d 528 , 533-534 [policy of discrimination against Jews in staffing Saudi Arabian hospital]; Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., Inc. (7th Cir. 1971) 444 F.2d 1186, 1188 [compulsory retirement policy discriminating against women].) Two cases from our own Courts of Ap…
Rule Authority · Wis. Ct. App.
Comm. Unit School Dist., 46 F.3d 682 (7th Cir. 1995); Torres v. Wisconsin DHSS, 838 F.2d 944 , 948 n.3 (7th Cir. 1988); Bartmess v. Drewrys USA, Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1188 (7th Cir. 1971).
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
The Seventh Circuit has held that retirement benefits are within the “compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment” covered under Title VIL See Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1189 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed.2d 252 (1971).
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
In that respect see, e.g., Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1188-89 (7th Cir.1971) (employer’s maintenance of allegedly discriminatory retirement plan held to be a continuing violation).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y. · signal: cf.
See United Air Lines, Inc. v. McMann, 434 U.S. 192, 208-09 , 98 S.Ct. 444, 452-53 (1977) (Marshall, J. dissenting); cf. Bartmess v. Drewys USA, Inc., supra, 444 F.2d at 1188; accord Moreman v. Georgia Power Co., 310 F.Supp. 327 (N.D.Ga.1969).
Rule Authority · N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.
Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., Inc., 444 F. 2d 1186, 1188 (7 Cir.1971), cert. den. 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed. 2d 252 (1971); Macklin v. Spector Freight Systems, Inc., 156 U.S. App. D.C. 69 , 478 F. 2d 979 (1973); Cox v. United States Gypsum Co., 409 F. 2d 289 (7 Cir.1969).
Rule Authority · N.D. Cal.
See Olson v. Rembrandt Printing Co., 511 F.2d 1228, 1233-1234 (8 Cir. 1976); Pacific Maritime Association v. Quinn, 491 F.2d 1294, 1296 (9 Cir. 1974); Macklin v. Spector Freight Systems, Inc., 156 U.S.App.D.C. 69 , 478 F.2d 979, 987 (1973); Molybdenum Corp. of America v. EEOC, 457 F.2d 935, 936 (10 Cir. 1972); Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1188 (7 Cir. 1971). 4 .
Rule Authority · M.D.N.C.
It is a case of prior discrimination reaching effectively into the present.” See also, Bartmess v. Drewrys, U. S. A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1188 (7th Cir., 1971) and Macklin v. Spector Freight Systems, Inc., 156 U.S.App.D.C. 69 , 478 F.2d 979, 987 (1973).
Rule Authority · E.D. Va.
Macklin v. Spector Freight Systems, Inc., 156 U.S.App.D.C. 69 , 478 F.2d 979, 987 (1973); Bartmess v. Drewrys U. S. A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1188 (7th Cir. 1971); Austin v. Reynolds Metals Co., 327 F.Supp. 1145, 1152 (E.D.Va.1970).
green Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer (1974)
Rule Authority · D. Conn.
Furthermore, the Act proscribes classifications by employers ‘. . . which would tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s . sex . . . . ’ Section 703(a)(2) [42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a) (2)].” Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1189 (7th Cir. 1971).
Rule Authority · D. Maryland
Ugiansky v. Flynn & Emrich Co., 337 F.Supp. 807 (D.Md.1972), citing, Bartmess v. Drewrys U. S. A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1189 (7th Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed.2d 252 (1971).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
As the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit stated in Bartmess v. Drewrys U. S. A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1188 (7th Cir. 1971), “ [i] t is settled law that the ninety day limitation is no bar when a continuing practice of discrimination is being challenged rather than a single, isolated discriminatory act.” The complaints which Hecht listed on the charging form clearly indicated that she was not alleging a single act of discrimination, but a continuing discriminatory patt…
Cited (see also) · SCOTUS · signal: see, e.g. · 2 citations in this opinion
See, e. g., Bartmess v. Drewrys U. S. A., Inc., 444 F. 2d 1186, 1188 (CA7 1971).
Cited · 7th Cir. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion
See Bartmess v. Drewrys, U.S.A., 444 F.2d 1186 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed.2d 252 (1971).
Cited · 7th Cir. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion
See Bartmess v. Drewrys, U.S.A., 444 F.2d 1186 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed.2d 252 (1971).
Cited (see also) · 7th Cir. · signal: see also
Tea Co., 871 F.2d 179, 183 (1st Cir.1989) (entire promotional system alleged to be discriminatory); see also Bartmess v. Drewrys USA, Inc., 444 F.2d 1186 (7th Cir.) (retirement policy openly discriminatory), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed.2d 252 (1971) 6 See also Sabree v. United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners Local No. 33, 921 F.2d 396, 402 (1st Cir.1990); Hendrix v. City of Yazoo City, 911 F.2d 1102, 1104 (5th Cir.1990); Glass v. Petro-Tex Chem.
green Selan v. Kiley (1992)
Cited (see also) · 7th Cir. · signal: see also
Tea Co., 871 F.2d 179, 183 (1st Cir.1989) (entire promotional system alleged to be discriminatory); see also Bartmess v. Drewrys USA, Inc., 444 F.2d 1186 (7th Cir.) (retirement policy openly discriminatory), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed.2d 252 (1971). .See also Sabree v. United Bhd. of Carpenters & loiners Local No. 33, 921 F.2d 396, 402 (1st Cir.1990); Hendrix v. City of Yazoo City, 911 F.2d 1102, 1104 (5th Cir.1990); Glass v. Petro-Tex Chem.
Cited (see also) · 7th Cir. · signal: see also
See also Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1189 (7th Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed.2d 252 .
Cited (see also) · 7th Cir. · signal: see also
See also Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186, 1189 (7th Cir. 1971), Cert. denied, 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed.2d 252 . 24 When the alleged unfair employment practice culminates in termination of employment rather than a layoff, courts have been unwilling to apply the continuing violation theory.
Cited (see also) · Cal. Ct. App. · signal: see also
(E.g., Williams v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (9th Cir.1982) 665 F.2d 918 , 924, cert. den. 459 U.S. 971 , 103 S.Ct. 302 , 74 L.Ed.2d 283 ( Williams ); Valdez, supra, 231 Cal.App.3d at pp. 1052-1053, 282 Cal.Rptr. 726 [discriminatory eligibility list]; see also Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A, Inc. (7th Cir. 1971) 444 F.2d 1186, 1187-1188 , cert. den. sub nom.
Cited (see also) · D. Minnesota · signal: see also
See also Bartmess v. Drewrys USA, Inc., 444 F.2d 1186 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed.2d 252 (1971).
Cited (see also) · S.D.N.Y. · signal: see, e.g.
See, e. g., Bartmess v. Drewrys U.S.A., Inc., 444 F.2d 1186 , 1188 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 274 , 30 L.Ed. 2d 252 (1971); Cox v. United States Gypsum Co., 409 F.2d 289 (7th Cir. 1969); Watson v. Limbach Co., 333 F. Supp. 754, 765 (S.D.Ohio 1971); Sciaraffa v. Oxford Paper Co., 310 F.Supp. 891, 896 (D.Maine 1970); Moreman v. Georgia Power Co., 310 F.Supp. 327 (N.D.Ga.1969); Hutchings v. United States Industries Inc., 309 F.Supp. 691 (E.D.