Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Civil Procedure — Jurisdiction

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//December 2, 2014//

Civil Procedure — Jurisdiction

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//December 2, 2014//

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Civil

Civil Procedure  — Jurisdiction

Where it is unclear whether two corporations are managed as separate entities, the district court erred in granting summary judgment to the defendant on the ground that it was the wrong party.

“What remains is Scheck Mechanical’s contention that it was entitled to summary judgment because it never employed Parker. We disagree, at least on the present summary judgment record. First, it may not matter which company employed Parker if, as Parker asserts, the line between the different Scheck companies is blurred. A defendant may be liable under Title VII if, by ignoring corporate formalities, its actions cannot be separated from an affiliate that employed the plaintiff. See Worth v. Tyer, 276 F.3d 249, 259–60 (7th Cir. 2001); Papa v. Katy Indus., Inc., 166 F.3d 937, 941 (7th Cir. 1999). Parker does not have overwhelming evidentiary sup-port for the proposition that the line between the two companies is blurred. Scheck Mechanical moved for summary judgment before he had conducted discovery. But he does have some evidence, including the representation on Scheck Industries’ own website that the various Scheck entities are all one company with one ‘corporate headquarters.’ See Contact Us, Scheck Industries, http://www.goscheck.com/”

Reversed and Remanded.

13-3693 Parker v. Scheck Mechanical Corp.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Holderman, J., Hamilton, J.

Full Text

 

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests