How cited: Willis Anderson LYGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee · Go Syfert

Willis Anderson LYGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee (1981)

green · 25 citation events across 9 courts. Showing the 13 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1981 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198120032026
Rule Authority · 6th Cir. · 4 citations in this opinion
The statutory scheme warrants an exception to the usual rules of res judicata and collateral estoppel.”); Lyght v. Ford Motor Co., 643 F.2d 435, 438 (6th Cir.1981) (“It is settled law that the doctrines of res judica-ta, collateral estoppel and election of remedies normally do not apply in Title VII actions.”).
Rule Authority · 4th Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
Co., 110 F.3d 431, 438 (7th Cir. 1997); Lyght v. Ford Motor Co., 643 F.2d 435, 441 (6th Cir. 1981).
Quote Authority · 6th Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
The statutory scheme warrants an exception to the usual rules of res judicata and collateral estoppel.”); Lyght v. Ford Motor Co., 643 F.2d 435, 438 (6th Cir. 1981) (“It is settled law that the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel and election of remedies normally do not apply in Title VII actions.”).
“It is settled law that the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel and election of remedies normally do not apply in Title VII actions.”
Rule Authority · D. Mass.
Swenson v. Management Recruiters Int’l., Inc., 858 F.2d 1304, 1308-1309 (8th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 848 , 110 S.Ct. 143 , 107 L.Ed.2d 102 (1989) (“Alexander makes clear that Congress intended the right in employment discrimination cases to have access to judicial remedies to outbalance the federal policy favoring arbitration.”); Nicholson v. CPC Int’l., Inc., 877 F.2d 221, 229 (3rd Cir.1989); Rosenfeld v. Dep’t of Army, 769 F.2d 237, 239 (4th Cir.1985) (“The plain…
Rule Authority · D.R.I.
Lyght v. Ford Motor Co., 643 F.2d 435, 439-40 (6th Cir.1981).
Rule Authority · N.D. Ohio
The Sixth Circuit, in Lyght v. Ford Motor Co., 643 F.2d 435, 439 (6th Cir.1981) (Lively, J.) explained Gardner-Denver: In reaching this conclusion, the Court found that the 1964 Act assigned ‘plenary powers’ to the federal courts ‘to secure compliance with Title VII,’ 415 U.S. at 45 , 94 S.Ct. at 1018 , and noted a legislative scheme in other civil rights acts of according “parallel or over-lapping remedies against discrimination.” Id. at 47 , 94 S.Ct. at 1019 .
Rule Authority · W.D. Pa.
Lyght v. Ford Motor Co., 643 F.2d 435, 441 (6th Cir. 1981); Watkins v. Scott Paper Co., 530 *1362 F.2d 1159,1172 (5th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 861 , 97 S.Ct. 163 , 50 L.Ed.2d 139 (1976).
Rule Authority · N.D. Ohio
Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co., 415 U.S. 36 , 94 S.Ct. 1011 , 39 L.Ed.2d 147 (1974); Lyght v. Ford Motor Co., 643 F.2d 435, 438-39 (6th Cir. 1981).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Lyght v. Ford Motor Co., 643 F.2d 435, 440 (6th Cir.1981) (“In determining that the settlement was voluntarily and knowingly made the court specifically noted that the plaintiff was represented by counsel at the time the last settlement was reached and accepted.”).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Lyght v. Ford Motor Co., 643 F.2d 435, 440 (6th Cir.1981) ("In determining that the settlement was voluntarily and knowingly made the court specifically noted that the plaintiff was represented by counsel at the time the last settlement was reached and accepted.").
Cited (see also) · 6th Cir. · signal: see also
See also the decision of this court in Lyght v. Ford Motor Company, 643 F.2d 435 (6th Cir. 1981), holding that an action by an employee under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 charging racial discrimination was not barred by an earlier *253 settlement effected by the Michigan Civil Rights Commission.
Cited (see also) · 8th Cir. · signal: see also
See also Lyght v. Ford Motor Co., 643 F.2d 435, 438-41 (6th Cir. 1981); Penson v. Terminal Transport Co., 634 F.2d 989, 992-96 (5th Cir. 1981); Woodson v. Fulton, 614 F.2d 940, 942 (4th Cir. 1980); Kemp v. Birmingham News Co., 608 F.2d 1049, 1052-54 (5th Cir. 1979); Fowler v. Birmingham News Co., 608 F.2d 1055, 1058-59 (5th Cir. 1979); Doninger v. Pacific Northwest Bell, Inc., 564 FÍ2d 1304, 1307 (9th Cir. 1977); United States v. Trucking Employers, Inc., 561 F.2d 313, 317 (…
Cited (see also) · 6th Cir. · signal: see also
See also Lyght v. Ford Motor Co., 643 F.2d 435, at 438 (6th Cir. filed March 9, 1981); Cooper v. Philip Morris, Inc., 464 F.2d 9 (6th Cir. 1972).