Free Pretrial Memorandum - District Court of Delaware - Delaware


File Size: 21.4 kB
Pages: 2
Date: June 1, 2007
File Format: PDF
State: Delaware
Category: District Court of Delaware
Author: unknown
Word Count: 329 Words, 2,216 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ded/35914/76-1.pdf

Download Pretrial Memorandum - District Court of Delaware ( 21.4 kB)


Preview Pretrial Memorandum - District Court of Delaware
Case 1:05-cv-00891-SLR

Document 76

Filed 06/01/2007

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

LINDA J. BLOZIS,

: : Plaintiff, : : v. : : : MELLON TRUST OF DELAWARE, : NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a : Pennsylvania Corporation; MELLON : BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION : (formerly, MELLON BANK (DE) : NATIONAL ASSOCIATION), a : Pennsylvania Corporation; and MELLON : FINANCIAL CORPORATION, a : Pennsylvania Corporation, : : Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-891 SLR

JOINT PRE-TRIAL STIPULATION AND ORDER (1) A statement of a nature of the action, the pleadings in which the issues are raised and whether counterclaims, cross-claims, etc., are involved.

Plaintiff's Statement: The parties in this case are Linda J. Blozis, the plaintiff, and Mellon Trust of Delaware, National Association; Mellon Bank, National Association; and Mellon Financial Corporation, the defendants. Plaintiff contends she was issued a "final" written warning and subsequently discharged from her job as Portfolio Administrator at the age of 57, in retaliation for filing with human resources an age discrimination complaint against her team leader and because of her age. Additionally, Plaintiff claims that she was discriminated against in the terms and conditions of her employment because of her age due to her team leader's preferential treatment of Plaintiff's 23 year old peer in granting her training, bonuses, and vacation requests, all in violation of the Age Discrimination in

Case 1:05-cv-00891-SLR

Document 76

Filed 06/01/2007

Page 2 of 2

Employment Act. Finally, Plaintiff claims that she was discriminated against in the terms and conditions of her employment because of her sex due to her team leader's preferential treatment of his one, lone male portfolio administrator who was not required to perform as much work as Plaintiff or other female peers, nor disciplined or discharged for his performance problems in violation of Title VII. Defendants deny all claims raised against them and contend that their actions were legitimate. The issues are raised in the Complaint and the Answer thereto. No counterclaims, crossclaims, etc. are in the case.

Blozis\pretrial\(01) Pl. Nature of the action