Added on - Sep 2019

Trusted by 2+ million users,
1000+ happy students everyday
Showing pages 1 to 1 of 2 pages
O UBRE V . E NTERGY O PERATIONS , I NC . S UPREME C OURT OF THE U NITED S TATES , 522 U.S. 422(1998).[Dolores Oubre worked as a scheduler at a power plant in Killona, Louisiana, run by heremployer, Entergy Operations, Inc. In 1994, she received a poor performance rating. Oubre ’ s supervisormet with her on January 17, 1995, and gave her the option of either improving her performance duringthe coming year or accepting a voluntary arrangement for her severance. She received a packet ofinformation about the severance agreement and had 14 days to consider her options, during which sheconsulted with attorneys. On January 31, Oubre decided to accept. She signed a release in which she “agreed] to waive, settle, release and discharge any and all claims, demands, damages, actions, or causesof action ... . that I may have against Entergy. ” In exchange, she received six installment payments overthe next four months, totaling $6,258. In procuring the release, Entergy failed to comply in at least threerespects with the requirements for a release under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, as setforth in the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act. It did not (1) give Oubre enough time to consider heroptions, (2) give her seven days to change her mind, or (3) make specific reference to ADEA claims. Afterreceiving her last severance payment, Oubre sued Entergy, alleging constructive discharge on the basisof her age in violation of the ADEA and state law. Entergy moved for summary judgment, claiming thatOubre had ratified the defective release by failing to return or offer to return the monies she
Desklib Logo
You are reading a preview
Upload your documents to download or

Become a Desklib member to get access