In the case of Dolores M. Oubre v. Entergy Operations, Inc., 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Oubre who had been terminated by her employer, Entergy Operations Inc., and was forced to sign a release agreement waiving her rights under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). The court held that an employee cannot waive their ADEA claims unless they are given a period of at least 21 days to consider the agreement and seven days to revoke it after signing as per Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA) guidelines. In this case, these conditions were not met when Oubre signed her release form on termination day without any consideration or revocation period offered by Entergy Operations Inc.. Therefore, despite having received severance pay from Entergy for which she did not offer restitution before filing suit against them for age discrimination; she was still allowed to proceed with her claim due to non-compliance with OWBPA regulations by her former employer.

In the dissenting opinion for Dolores M. Oubre v. Entergy Operations, Inc., Justice John Paul Stevens argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with Congress' intent when it enacted the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). He believed that a strict interpretation of this law would not require an employee to return their severance pay before filing a lawsuit against their employer for age discrimination. Instead, he suggested that such requirement could deter victims from seeking justice due to financial constraints and thus undermine ADEA’s purpose of protecting older workers from discriminatory practices. Furthermore, he contended that if Congress had intended such a harsh rule, they would have explicitly stated so in the statute itself.