§

Anita Langley, Complainant, v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Agency.

01a15000 (E.E.O.C. Jun. 2, 2003)
Anita Langley, Complainant, v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Agency.

8 Cited authorities

  1. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green

    411 U.S. 792 (1973)   Cited 53,210 times   96 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 12,389 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 20,203 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. U.S. Postal Service Bd. of Govs. v. Aikens

    460 U.S. 711 (1983)   Cited 2,419 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because "[t]here will seldom be `eyewitness' testimony to the employer's mental process," evidence of the employer's discriminatory attitude in general is relevant and admissible to prove discrimination

  5. Heyman v. Queens Village Comm. for Mental Hlth

    198 F.3d 68 (2d Cir. 1999)   Cited 280 times
    Finding that an employer could "regard as" disabled an employee who had lymphoma where the employer had knowledge of employee's diagnosis and a previous employee had died from the same disease

  6. 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"

  7. Swanks v. Washington Met. Area Transit

    179 F.3d 929 (D.C. Cir. 1999)   Cited 50 times
    Observing that an employer "`may not obtain summary judgment by declaring it has a policy when [the employee] may have evidence that [the employer] follows the policy . . . selectively'" (quoting Baert v. Euclid Beverage, Ltd., 149 F.3d 626, 632 (7th Cir. 1998))

  8. 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