COMO

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (12 total)

• Lingle v. Norge Div. of Magic Chef, Inc., 486 U.S. 399 (U.S. 1988)
  …claim, Kelsay v. Motorola, Inc., 74 Ill. 2d 172, 384 N. E. 2d 353 (1978),6 and [*407] have held that it is applicable to employees covered by union contracts, Midgett v. Sackett-Chicago, Inc., 105 Ill. 2d 143, 473 N. E. 2d 1280 (1984), cert. denied, 474 U. S. 909 (1985). “[T]o show retaliatory discharge, the plaintiff must set forth sufficient facts from'which it can be inferred that (1) he was discharged or threatened with discharge and (2) the employer’s motive in discharging or threatening to discharge hi…
• Jonna R. Lingle v. Norge Div. OF Magic Chef, Inc., 823 F.2d 1031 (7th Cir. 1987)
  …ments: New Obstacles Imposed By Federal Labor Law Preemption, 1985 S.Ill.L.Rev. 707, 709 (footnote omitted). This uncertainty was resolved in Midgett v. Sackett-Chicago, Inc., 105 Ill.2d 143, 85 Ill.Dec. 475, 473 N.E. 2d 1280 (1984), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 909, 106 S.Ct. 278, 88 L.Ed.2d 243 (1985), in which the court held that an employee covered by a collective bargaining agreement could file suit against an employer if the employer had discharged the employee in retaliation for seeking benefits under th…
• Prestress Eng'g Corp. v. Gonzalez, 483 U.S. 1032 (U.S. 1987)
  …when the suing employee is covered by a collective-bargaining agreement. The Illinois Supreme Court here, relying on its earlier opinion in Midgett v. Sackett-Chicago, Inc., 105 Ill. 2d 143, 473 N. E. 2d 1280, cert. denied, 472 U. S. 1032 (1984) and 474 U. S. 909 (1985), held that the state claim was not pre-empted. The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, faced with an almost identical state-law claim for retaliatory discharge, concluded that under our opinion in Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. Lueck, 471 U. S.…