26 U.S.C. § 621
Repealed. Pub. L. 101–508, title XI, § 11801(a)(28), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1388–521]
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1986–2024 · leading case: Crowe v. Paragon Relocation Resources, Inc., 506 F. Supp. 2d 1113 (N.D. Fla. 2007).
Crowe v. Paragon Relocation Resources, Inc., 506 F. Supp. 2d 1113 (N.D. Fla. 2007). “Plaintiff alleges that Paragon’s decision was motivated by his age and thus in violation of both the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 26 U.S.C. § 621 , et seq., and the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992.”
Chapman v. City of Detroit, 808 F.2d 459 (6th Cir. 1986). “The district court correctly held that an ADEA action is subject to dismissal if it is commenced without first giving the EEOC 60 days in which to attempt conciliation.”
Warren v. Delaware Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs. (Del. Super. Ct. 2022). “It is not clear whether Warren is advancing her age discrimination claim under the federal statute, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 26 U.S.C. § 621 ef seg. (hereinafter the “ADEA”), or the Delaware statute, the Delaware Discrimination in Employment Act, 19 Del.”
Dunn v. Speer (E.D. Ky. 2019). “, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (the “ADEA”), 26 U.S.C. §621 et seq. Plaintiff alleges that the Army discriminated against him in 2013 when it had him re-evaluated for a workplace injury he suffered in 1994, then offered him a position that he was unable to…”
Jones v. Ebert (D. Nev. 2024). “Screening the Complaint 14 Upon granting Plaintiff’s IFP application the Court must screen her Complaint under 28 15 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.