From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Flight Attendants

U.S.
Mar 2, 1988
485 U.S. 175 (1988)

Summary

upholding distinction between § 216 actions in which prejudgment interest is not recoverable and § 217 actions in which prejudgment interest is recoverable

Summary of this case from Reich v. Tiller Helicopter Service, Inc.

Opinion

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

No. 86-1650.

Argued January 12, 1988 Decided March 2, 1988

809 F.2d 483, affirmed by an equally divided Court.

Murray Gartner argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs were Paul E. Donnelly, Mark A. Buckstein, and Michael A. Katz.

Steven A. Fehr argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were William A. Jolley, Doyle R. Pryor, and Scott A. Raisher.

Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed for the Crossover Flight Attendants by Mark P. Johnson; and for Some Working TWA Flight Attendants by Robert F. Gore, Rossie D. Alston, Jr., and Rex H. Reed.
Marsha Berzon, William Mahoney, John Clarke, Jr., and Laurence Gold filed a brief for the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations et al. as amici curiae urging affirmance.


The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is affirmed by an equally divided Court.

JUSTICE KENNEDY took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.


Summaries of

Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Flight Attendants

U.S.
Mar 2, 1988
485 U.S. 175 (1988)

upholding distinction between § 216 actions in which prejudgment interest is not recoverable and § 217 actions in which prejudgment interest is recoverable

Summary of this case from Reich v. Tiller Helicopter Service, Inc.
Case details for

Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Flight Attendants

Case Details

Full title:TRANS WORLD AIRLINES, INC. v . INDEPENDENT FEDERATION OF FLIGHT ATTENDANTS

Court:U.S.

Date published: Mar 2, 1988

Citations

485 U.S. 175 (1988)
108 S. Ct. 1101

Citing Cases

ABA STANDARDS GUIDELINES

A legal argument is frivolous only if it is obviously and wholly without merit. Hoover Universal, Inc. v.…

York v. City of Wichita Falls, Tex.

Finally, "even if the employer does introduce evidence supporting a `good faith and reasonable belief'…