Larry Powell v. Dallas Morning News, L.P.

486 F. App'x 469
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedAugust 20, 2012
Docket11-10697
StatusUnpublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 486 F. App'x 469 (Larry Powell v. Dallas Morning News, L.P.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Larry Powell v. Dallas Morning News, L.P., 486 F. App'x 469 (5th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

The plaintiffs were terminated as part of a reduction-in-force and sued, alleging disparate impact and disparate treatment under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) and claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”). The district court, per a magistrate judge designated by consent under 28 U.S.C. § 686(c), issued a 145-page Memorandum Opinion and Order granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

We have read the briefs on appeal and have consulted the applicable law and pertinent portions of the record and have heard the arguments of counsel. We conclude that the plaintiffs did not give adequate notice of their specific disparate-impact claim and did not make a prima facie case of disparate-impact age discrimination under the ADEA. The defendants established a sufficient reasonable-faetor-other-than-age defense and fulfilled their disclosure duties under ERISA.

The summary judgment is AFFIRMED, essentially for the reasons given by the magistrate judge in his comprehensive opinion.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Davis v. District of Columbia Child and Family Services Agency,et Al
246 F. Supp. 3d 367 (District of Columbia, 2017)
Rudolph Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works LLC
849 F.3d 61 (Third Circuit, 2017)
Regan v. City of Charleston
131 F. Supp. 3d 541 (D. South Carolina, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
486 F. App'x 469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/larry-powell-v-dallas-morning-news-lp-ca5-2012.