§
Agency.

6 Cited authorities

  1. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green

    411 U.S. 792 (1973)   Cited 53,782 times   100 Legal Analyses
    Holding in employment discrimination case that statistical evidence of employer's general policy and practice may be relevant circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent behind individual employment decision

  2. St. Mary's Honor Ctr. v. Hicks

    509 U.S. 502 (1993)   Cited 12,476 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a trier of fact may infer discrimination upon rejecting an employer's proffered reason for termination

  3. Tex. Dept. of Cmty. Affairs v. Burdine

    450 U.S. 248 (1981)   Cited 20,350 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding in the Title VII context that the plaintiff's prima facie case creates "a legally mandatory, rebuttable presumption" that shifts the burden of proof to the employer, and "if the employer is silent in the face of the presumption, the court must enter judgment for the plaintiff"

  4. Hochstadt v. Worcester Foundation for Experimental Biology

    545 F.2d 222 (1st Cir. 1976)   Cited 249 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, in balancing the scope of reasonable opposition conduct, "[t]he requirements of the job and the tolerable limits of conduct in a particular setting must be explored"

  5. Hochstadt v. Worcester Foundation, Etc.

    425 F. Supp. 318 (D. Mass. 1976)   Cited 87 times
    Holding that discharge six months after EEOC settlement and a month after an informal complaint satisfies causation requirement

  6. Payne v. Illinois Cent. Gulf R.R.

    665 F. Supp. 1308 (W.D. Tenn. 1987)   Cited 9 times

    No. 82-2703 H. August 4, 1987. Donald A. Donati, Memphis, Tenn., for plaintiff. Charles Burr, Memphis, Tenn., for defendant. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING JUDGMENT TO DEFENDANT AND DISMISSING LAWSUIT HORTON, Chief Judge. C.P. Payne filed this lawsuit against Illinois Central Gulf Railroad (ICGR), charging the defendant railroad discriminated against him on the basis of his age and race. Mr. Payne claims the defendant's conduct has violated legal rights guaranteed him under Title VII of the Civil