§

Edie R. v. U.S. Postal Serv.

EEOC Appeal No. 0120160784 (E.E.O.C. May. 10, 2018)
Edie R. v. U.S. Postal Serv.

5 Cited authorities

  1. Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    340 U.S. 474 (1951)   Cited 9,575 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 "

  2. Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody

    422 U.S. 405 (1975)   Cited 2,616 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employment policy cannot stand if another policy, "without a similarly undesirable racial effect, would also serve the employer's legitimate interest"

  3. 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"

  4. Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co.

    424 U.S. 747 (1976)   Cited 1,097 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the interests of "unnamed members of the class" who are entitled to relief may satisfy the case-or-controversy requirement

  5. West v. Gibson

    527 U.S. 212 (1999)   Cited 112 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the phrase "appropriate remedies" in 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–16(b) includes remedies not expressly enumerated