Complainant, v. Timothy F. Geithner, Secretary, Department of the Treasury (Bureau of Engraving and Printing), Agency.

14 Cited authorities

  1. Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc.

    530 U.S. 133 (2000)   Cited 21,526 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "trier of fact can reasonably infer from the falsity of the explanation that the employer is dissembling to cover up a discriminatory purpose"
  2. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green

    411 U.S. 792 (1973)   Cited 53,194 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
  3. St. Mary's Honor Ctr. v. Hicks

    509 U.S. 502 (1993)   Cited 12,388 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a trier of fact may infer discrimination upon rejecting an employer's proffered reason for termination
  4. Tex. Dept. of Cmty. Affairs v. Burdine

    450 U.S. 248 (1981)   Cited 20,198 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"
  5. 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
  6. Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    340 U.S. 474 (1951)   Cited 9,673 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 "
  7. Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters

    438 U.S. 567 (1978)   Cited 2,179 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a district court was "entitled to consider the racial mix of the work force when trying to make the determination as to motivation" in the employment discrimination context
  8. Pullman-Standard v. Swint

    456 U.S. 273 (1982)   Cited 1,625 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"
  9. Bauer v. Bailar

    647 F.2d 1037 (10th Cir. 1981)   Cited 81 times
    Holding employer's subjective hiring criteria to be nonpretextual where the subjective factors considered were articulated and generally relevant to the job
  10. Section 2000e - Definitions

    42 U.S.C. § 2000e   Cited 52,462 times   130 Legal Analyses
    Granting EEOC authority to issue procedural regulations to carry out Title VII provisions
  11. Section 794 - Nondiscrimination under Federal grants and programs

    29 U.S.C. § 794   Cited 12,640 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Adopting ADA standards for Rehabilitation Act claims
  12. Section 791 - Employment of individuals with disabilities

    29 U.S.C. § 791   Cited 2,302 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Adopting standards for ADA claims under § 501 of the Rehabilitation Act, including 42 U.S.C. § 12112, which forbids discrimination "against a qualified individual with a disability because of the disability . . ."
  13. Section 1614.604 - Filing and computation of time

    29 C.F.R. § 1614.604   Cited 140 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing the time limits applicable to the subject regulations "are subject to waiver, estoppel and equitable tolling"
  14. Section 1614.405 - Decisions on appeals

    29 C.F.R. § 1614.405   Cited 83 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Providing that " decision [of the EEOC in an administrative appeal] is final . . . unless . . . [e]ither party files a timely request for reconsideration"