The Lorillard v. Pons case in 1977 revolved around the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and whether or not it allowed for jury trials. The plaintiff, Mary Pons, had worked as a secretary at Lorillard Corporation until she was fired at age 62. She filed a lawsuit claiming that her termination was due to age discrimination under ADEA. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Pons, stating that the language used within ADEA suggested Congress intended for individuals to have access to trial by jury when seeking legal remedies under this act. This decision clarified an important aspect of how cases involving alleged violations of ADEA would be handled moving forward.

In the dissenting opinion for Lorillard v. Pons, Justice William Rehnquist disagreed with the majority's decision to allow a jury trial under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). He argued that Congress did not explicitly provide for a right to a jury trial in ADEA cases and thus, it should be assumed that they intended these cases to follow traditional equity practice which does not include juries. Furthermore, he contended that by allowing juries into this area of law without explicit congressional approval could potentially disrupt established legal practices and principles. Therefore, he believed it was inappropriate for the Court to infer such an important procedural right from ambiguous statutory language.