Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

736 F.2d 1240

Docket No. 84-1125.

Rothenberger v. Douglas County

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted June 12, 1984.

Decided June 20, 1984.

Rehearing Denied July 26, 1984.

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1984-06-20

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1984

1 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Coleman v. Block

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1984-06-20

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*1241Valerie McNaughton, Denver, Colo., for appellants.

¶2James W. Olson, States Atty., Armour, S.D., John W. Morrison, David L. Weinstein, Karon, Morrison & Savikas, Ltd., Chicago, Ill., for appellee; Karon, Morrison & Savikas, Ltd., Chicago, Ill., of counsel.

¶3Before HEANEY and JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judges, and HANSQN,* Senior District Judge.

¶5ORDER

¶6Emil Rothenberger, an employee of Douglas County in South Dakota, sued the county on behalf of himself and other similarly situated individuals alleging that the county’s failure to participate in the state retirement plan violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634 (1982); the due process clause; and unspecified state law. The district court dismissed the action with prejudice concluding that Rothenberger filed his complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission after the 180-day limitation period had run and that his complaints of retaliation and due process violations failed to state causes of action, 580 F.Supp. 210. Rothenberger appeals this dismissal.

¶7We have carefully considered the briefs of both parties, the record on appeal, the district court’s opinion, and the parties’ oral arguments. Finding no error of law or fact, we affirm based on the well-reasoned decision of the district court. See 8th Cir.R. 14.

/736/f2d/1240 · .json · Public domain