George R. Burchfield, Complainant, v. Lawrence H. Summers, Secretary, Department of the Treasury, Agency.

16 Cited authorities

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
411 U.S. 792 (1973) Cited 52,401 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
St. Mary's Honor Ctr. v. Hicks
509 U.S. 502 (1993) Cited 12,282 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that a trier of fact may infer discrimination upon rejecting an employer's proffered reason for termination
Tex. Dept. of Cmty. Affairs v. Burdine
450 U.S. 248 (1981) Cited 19,994 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"
Sutton v. United Air Lines, Inc.
527 U.S. 471 (1999) Cited 2,897 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that " person whose physical or mental impairment is corrected by medication or other measures does not have an impairment that presently 'substantially limits' a major life activity."
Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody
422 U.S. 405 (1975) Cited 2,615 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"
Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters
438 U.S. 567 (1978) Cited 2,164 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
Cleveland v. Policy Management Systems Corp.
526 U.S. 795 (1999) Cited 839 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that in order to discredit an affidavit at summary judgment, it must, for example, "flatly contradict that party's earlier sworn deposition"
Albertsons, Inc. v. Kirkingburg
527 U.S. 555 (1999) Cited 680 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that although vision-impaired individuals may not have "an onerous burden" in demonstrating disability and "ordinarily will meet the [ADA]'s definition of disability," they must still offer evidence of "limitation in terms of their own experience"
Murphy v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
527 U.S. 516 (1999) Cited 502 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that the "determination of [a person's] disability is made with reference to the mitigating measures he employs."
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
Appendix to Part 1630 - Interpretive Guidance on Title I of the Americans With Disabilities Act
29 C.F.R. § 1630 app to Part 1630 Cited 860 times 8 Legal Analyses
Determining whether an individual is substantially limited in a major life activity entails the nature and severity of the impairment; the duration or expected duration of the impairment; and the permanent or long term impact

George R. Burchfield, Complainant, v. Lawrence H. Summers, Secretary, Department of the Treasury, Agency.

16 Cited authorities

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

Holding that a trier of fact may infer discrimination upon rejecting an employer's proffered reason for termination

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"

Holding that " person whose physical or mental impairment is corrected by medication or other measures does not have an impairment that presently 'substantially limits' a major life activity."

Holding that an employment policy cannot stand if another policy, "without a similarly undesirable racial effect, would also serve the employer's legitimate interest"

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

Holding that in order to discredit an affidavit at summary judgment, it must, for example, "flatly contradict that party's earlier sworn deposition"

Holding that although vision-impaired individuals may not have "an onerous burden" in demonstrating disability and "ordinarily will meet the [ADA]'s definition of disability," they must still offer evidence of "limitation in terms of their own experience"

Holding that the "determination of [a person's] disability is made with reference to the mitigating measures he employs."

Holding that the interests of "unnamed members of the class" who are entitled to relief may satisfy the case-or-controversy requirement

Determining whether an individual is substantially limited in a major life activity entails the nature and severity of the impairment; the duration or expected duration of the impairment; and the permanent or long term impact