Beatrice D. Saxion v. Titan-C-Manufacturing, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that applying the well-established meaning of the term “back pay” to its use in the WARN Act corresponds with the legislative history and that adopted by the Fifth Circuit in Carpenters.
• noting with approval the Fifth Circuit’s conclusion that “the WARN Act contains no provision that would allow an employer to reduce its statutory liability by the amount of its employees’ outside earnings”
• \[N]either the Act nor the regulations suggest that defective notice is automatically to be treated as though no notice had been provided at all.\
• “[N]either the Act nor the regulations suggest that defective notice is automatically to be treated as though no notice had been provided at all.”
• “even where good faith is manifest, moreover, the decision to reduce the amount of damages is within the discretion of the district court”
• “The language of Rule 42(b) places the decision to bifurcate within the discretion of the district court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).