Supreme Court of Mississippi Cash Distributing Company, Inc. V. James Neely Case Study

Open, View, and/or
Download this Document

Total Length: 875 words ( 3 double-spaced pages)

Total Sources: 3

Page 1 of 3

Supreme Court of Mississippi. CASH DISTRIBUTING COMPANY, INC. v. James NEELY.

Facts

In 1973, James Neely started working for Cash Distributing Co., a company that distributed Anheuser-Busch products in several parts of the United States. The company had offices in Columbus, Starkville and Tupelo. During the 1990s, James Neely was heading the Columbus office. By this time, Anheuser-Busch started to look more closely at the way some of its rules were enforced, something that was not traditionally the practice in the past, when the company was more informal about these procedures. The company's new CEO, Danny Cash, also aimed to properly enforce these new rules and regulations.

However, James Neely refused to abide by all these new regulations, particularly since, throughout his career with the company, these had never been required. As a consequence, in March 2000, Neely was dismissed and replaced as the head of the Columbus office by another employee who was much younger than Neely (38 years old at the time).

Neely sued the company, claiming that the reason for his dismissal was age and age discrimination, something that was federally prohibited. According to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), specific discrimination actions are prohibited, including discrimination in termination of employment and layoffs.

Neely won the trial court, but the Cash Distributing Company appealed, claiming that "Neely failed to rebut every nondiscriminatory reason offered at trial for the dismissal"[footnoteRef:1].

Stuck Writing Your "Supreme Court of Mississippi Cash Distributing Company, Inc. V. James Neely" Case Study?

View All Our Example Supreme Court of Mississippi Cash Distributing Company, Inc. V. James Neely Case Study

Have A Custom Example Essay Written

This basically meant that the company's case was based on the idea that Neely was actually laid off because of other reasons than age, namely his incapacity to perform according to the regulations that the company had imposed. As a consequence, their case implied that Neely had to rebut all these allegations in order to support his own case that it was age discrimination that led to his being laid off. Neely also appealed, asking for additional damages. [1: Cash Distributing Company Inc. Vs. James Neely. On the Internet at http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ms-supreme-court/1112377.html. Last retrieved on February 4, 2014]

The Court of Appeals reaffirmed the decision from the trial court's in favor of Neely. As to Neely's cross-appeal, it was partly affirmed and partly remanded by the Court of Appeals. Thus, Neely received an additional $58,754. Three judges from the Court of Appeals dissented, pointing out that there was no direct evidence of age discrimination, despite several memos written by the company CEO that contained age-related comments.

In discussing this case, there are several elements that need to be taken into consideration. These include the specific conditions provided by the ADEA and referring to age discrimination; the evaluations of Neely's activity with the company; and any….....

Show More ⇣

     Open the full completed essay and source list


OR

     Order a one-of-a-kind custom essay on this topic


sample essay writing service

Cite This Resource:

Latest APA Format (6th edition)

Copy Reference
"Supreme Court Of Mississippi Cash Distributing Company Inc V James Neely" (2014, February 04) Retrieved May 21, 2025, from
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/supreme-court-mississippi-cash-distributing-182101

Latest MLA Format (8th edition)

Copy Reference
"Supreme Court Of Mississippi Cash Distributing Company Inc V James Neely" 04 February 2014. Web.21 May. 2025. <
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/supreme-court-mississippi-cash-distributing-182101>

Latest Chicago Format (16th edition)

Copy Reference
"Supreme Court Of Mississippi Cash Distributing Company Inc V James Neely", 04 February 2014, Accessed.21 May. 2025,
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/supreme-court-mississippi-cash-distributing-182101
   

Open, View, and/or
Download this Document
order custom essay example