John D. Starceski, at No. 94-3208 v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, at No. 94-3182

How courts have described this case

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

• noting in support of its decision that reinstatement was inappropriate that the plaintiff “failed to object when the trial judge instructed the jury on front pay, even though he intended to make a motion for reinstatement”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).