1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 247 F.3d
  5. 247 F.3d 471 (2001)
 

PEARSON v. COMPONENT TECHNOLOGY CORP.

No. 00-3056.

247 F.3d 471 (2001)

Thomas PEARSON; John Kowalkowski, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Appellants, v. COMPONENT TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION a/k/a CompTech; General Electric Capital Corporation; TIFD VIII-R, Inc.; Thomas P. Agresti, Esq.; Kenneth Chestek, Trustees.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Filed: April 13, 2001.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Rolf L. Patberg (Argued), Patberg, Carmody & Ging Pittsburgh, PA, Richard E. Filippi, Filippi & Nies, Erie, PA, Counsel for Appellants.

Richard A. Lanzillo (Argued), Know, McLaughlin, Gornall & Sennett, P.C., Erie, PA, Counsel for Appellees GE Capital Corporation and TIFD VIII-R Inc.

Before BECKER, Chief Judge, SCIRICA and FUENTES, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

BECKER, Chief Judge.

The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act of 1988 (the WARN Act), 29 U.S.C. § 2101 et seq., mandates that employers provide workers with 60 days' notice (subject to certain exceptions not at issue in this appeal) prior to a plant closing or mass layoff, and allows various remedies for workers when closures are not preceded by the requisite notification. Because a plant closure often presages a

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases