CompFox AI Summary
The case involves an employee, Mastellone, suing his employer, Publix Super Markets, Inc., for age discrimination under the ADEA and THRA, along with a state-law claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress. Publix filed a counterclaim for breach of contract related to a relocation agreement. Mastellone was terminated following an investigation into the sale of out-of-date meat, an offense for which he had previously received warnings. The court granted summary judgment for Publix on the federal age discrimination claims, finding insufficient evidence of pretext or discriminatory animus as the but-for cause for termination. The remaining state-law claims and Publix's counterclaim were dismissed for lack of supplemental jurisdiction.
Mastellone v. Publix Super Markets, Inc. is a workers' compensation case decided in District Court, E.D. Tennessee. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in District Court, E.D. Tennessee.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The case involves an employee, Mastellone, suing his employer, Publix Super Markets, Inc., for age discrimination under the ADEA and THRA, along with a state-law claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress. Publix filed a counterclaim for breach of contract related to a relocation agreement. Mastellone was terminated following an investigation into the sale of out-of-date meat, an offense for which he had previously received warnings. The court granted summary judgment for Publix on the federal age discrimination claims, finding insufficient evidence of pretext or discriminatory animus as the but-for cause for termination. The remaining state-law claims and Publix's counterclaim were dismissed for lack of supplemental jurisdiction.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.