Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Robertson Cheatham Farmer’s Cooperative

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
File Name: 04a0108n.06
Filed: November 18, 2004
No. 03-6338
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ROBERTSON CHEATHAM FARMER’S
COOPERATIVE,
Defendant-Appellant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ON APPEAL FROM THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE MIDDLE
DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
M E M O R A N D U M
O P I N I O N
BEFORE: NORRIS, BATCHELDER and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM. Defendant, Robertson Cheatham Farmer’s Cooperative, appeals from a
jury verdict awarding back pay in an action brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission on behalf of a former employee of defendant, based on the Age Discrimination in
Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. Defendant contends that the district court erred
when it denied its motions for judgment as a matter of law, new trial, or remittitur.
Having had the benefit of oral argument and having carefully considered the record on
appeal, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, we are not persuaded that the district court
erred in denying defendant the relief it sought.
Because the reasoning which supports the district court’s rulings has been articulated by the
district court, the issuance of a detailed written opinion by this court would be duplicative and serve

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 03-6338
EEOC v. Robertson Cheatham
- 2 -
no useful purpose. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed upon the reasoning
employed by that court in its Memorandum Opinion dated September 5, 2003.

-- 2 of 2 --