Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Tenneco Oil Co. v. Kern Oil & Refining Co.
488 U.S. 948
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1988-11-07
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- holding section 1821 applicable to fee-shifting provision of Equal Pay Act because "the broad language in Crawford Fitting does not permit a distinction based upon whether or not the award is made under a fee-shifting statute"
- in context of liquidated damages award arising under Equal Pay Act, court rejects discredited argument that market forces led defendant-employer to reasonable belief that discriminatory pay practices were in conformity with law
- new claims by plaintiff related back to original complaint filed against same defendant because amended claim arose out of original transaction or occurrence
- “[W]e have allowed a party to raise res judicata after the initial pleadings by construing the attempt as a motion to file a supplemental answer.... [W]e have always required that [res judicata] be raised before trial.”
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Tenneco Oil Co. v. Kern Oil & Refining Co.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 63 opinions
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Justice Stevens took no part in the consideration or decision of-this petition.