Dister v. Continental Group, Inc.

3 Analyses of this case by attorneys

  1. Can the ACA Employer Health-Insurance Mandate Be Avoided by Reducing Employees’ Hours? McGuireWoods Healthcare Reform Guide: Installment No. 56

    McGuireWoods LLPFelicia GardnerApril 22, 2016

    Other Cases in the Second Circuit The courts in several cases in the Second Circuit have ruled in favor of employers in connection with Section 510 claims. In Dister v. Cont’l Grp, Inc., 859 F.2d 1108 (2d Cir. 1988), the court of appeals affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the employer, finding that no reasonable jury could find that the employer intentionally fired a complaining employee to interfere with his ability to obtain certain retirement plan benefits because there was insufficient evidence presented that the employer had a discriminatory motive for terminating him. In Kelly v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 717 F. Supp. 227 (S.D.N.Y. 1989), the district court granted summary judgment for an employer because the complaining employee’s claim that he was prevented from enjoying a future benefit, not created at the time of his discharge, was not a cognizable claim under Section 510.

  2. Reinsurer Must Follow the Fortunes of Its Reasonable Cedent

    Goldberg SegallaFebruary 15, 2016

    As such, there is no outstanding billing for those expenses and a reasonable jury could not find otherwise. (Id.); see Dister v. Continental Grp., Inc., 859 F.2d 1108, 1114 (2d Cir. 1988) (explaining that for a fact to defeat summary judgment it must "allow a reasonable jury to return a verdict for the nonmoving party"). Clearwater does not dispute the reimbursement and does not specifically contest the billings of any other declaratory judgment expense.

  3. A Primer on Employment Discrimination Motion Practice

    Goldberg SegallaMarch 7, 2013

    Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 253, 101 S. Ct. 1089, 67 L. Ed. 2d 207 (1981). The burden of stating a prima facie case sufficient to overcome a motion for summary judgment is de minimis, Dister v. Continental Group, Inc., 859 F.2d 1108, 1114 (2d Cir. 1988). Based on the de minimis standard for stating a prima facie case, I find that plaintiff’s claim that a less-qualified white male was hired for the position she sought states a prima facie case of employment discrimination.