WILLIAMS v. WAL-MART STORES INC

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

No. 97-10685

Attorney(S)

Mark C. Brodeur, Dallas, TX, for Williams. Jimmy Preston Wrotenbery, Kevin D. Jewell, Magenheim, Bateman, Robinson, Wrotenbery Helfand, Houston, TX, for Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Geoffrey Lundeen Carter, EEOC, Office of the General Counsel, Washington, DC, for EEOC, Amicus Curiae. Allison Anne Jones, Davidson, Nix Jones, Shreveport, LA, Paula Ann Brantner, San Francisco, CA, for Nat. Emp. Lawyers Ass'n, Amicus Curiae.

Judges

Henry Anthony Politz
E. Grady Jolly
Patrick Errol Higginbotham
W. Eugene Davis
Edith Hollan Jones
Jacques Loeb Wiener
Harold R. DeMoss
Fortunato Pedro Benavides
Carl E. Stewart
James L. Dennis
Carolyn Dineen King

Are you a practicing lawyer?

Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.

Upload pleading to use the new AI search

Click here to upload

Cites

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

No. 97-10685

Attorney(S)

Mark C. Brodeur, Dallas, TX, for Williams. Jimmy Preston Wrotenbery, Kevin D. Jewell, Magenheim, Bateman, Robinson, Wrotenbery Helfand, Houston, TX, for Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Geoffrey Lundeen Carter, EEOC, Office of the General Counsel, Washington, DC, for EEOC, Amicus Curiae. Allison Anne Jones, Davidson, Nix Jones, Shreveport, LA, Paula Ann Brantner, San Francisco, CA, for Nat. Emp. Lawyers Ass'n, Amicus Curiae.

Judges

Henry Anthony Politz
E. Grady Jolly
Patrick Errol Higginbotham
W. Eugene Davis
Edith Hollan Jones
Jacques Loeb Wiener
Harold R. DeMoss
Fortunato Pedro Benavides
Carl E. Stewart
James L. Dennis
Carolyn Dineen King

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

JULIE DEFFENBAUGH WILLIAMS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE-CROSS-APPELLANT, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS, WAL-MART STORES, INC., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT-CROSS-APPELLEE.

PER CURIAM:

The en banc court reinstates the panel opinion, except for Part II C relating to punitive damages, and remands this matter to the panel for appropriate disposition of the punitive damages issue in light of the intervening decision in Kolstad v. American Dental Ass'n, 119 S.Ct. 2118 (1999).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

JULIE DEFFENBAUGH WILLIAMS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE-CROSS-APPELLANT, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS, WAL-MART STORES, INC., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT-CROSS-APPELLEE.

Comments