§

Arnold J. Kazmer, Complainant, v. Paul H. O'Neill, Secretary, Department of the Treasury (Customs Service), Agency.

01993016 (E.E.O.C. Jun. 7, 2002)
Arnold J. Kazmer, Complainant, v. Paul H. O'Neill, Secretary, Department of the Treasury (Customs Service), Agency.

5 Cited authorities

  1. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green

    411 U.S. 792 (1973)   Cited 52,294 times   95 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. Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    340 U.S. 474 (1951)   Cited 9,569 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "

  3. Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston

    469 U.S. 111 (1985)   Cited 1,857 times
    Holding McDonnell Douglas is inapplicable when direct evidence is presented

  4. Pullman-Standard v. Swint

    456 U.S. 273 (1982)   Cited 1,614 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[w]hen an appellate court discerns that a district court has failed to make a finding because of an erroneous view of the law, the usual rule is that there should be a remand for further proceedings to permit the trial court to make the missing findings"

  5. Randle v. LaSalle Telecommunications, Inc.

    876 F.2d 563 (7th Cir. 1989)   Cited 224 times
    Holding that "direct evidence, if believed by the trier of fact, will prove the particular fact in question without reliance upon inference or presumption"