Isaac J. Smith, Complainant, v. John McHugh, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

9 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 239,938 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
477 U.S. 317 (1986) Cited 219,512 times 40 Legal Analyses
Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
411 U.S. 792 (1973) Cited 52,935 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
Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins
490 U.S. 228 (1989) Cited 4,640 times 162 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employer discriminated on the basis of sex when he "act[ed] on the basis of a belief that a woman cannot be aggressive, or that she must not be"
Long v. Eastfield Coll.
88 F.3d 300 (5th Cir. 1996) Cited 1,104 times
Holding that "oppos[ing]" any practice that the employee reasonably believes to be prohibited by Title VII is protected activity under that statue (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a))
Russell v. McKinney Hosp. Venture
235 F.3d 219 (5th Cir. 2000) Cited 845 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that coworker's frequently repeated comment that the plaintiff was an "old bitch" showed a discriminatory animus
Shager v. Upjohn Co.
913 F.2d 398 (7th Cir. 1990) Cited 505 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that a supervisor's age-based prejudice tainted a committee's decision to fire the plaintiff because the supervisor's portrayal of the plaintiff to the committee in the worst possible light "may well have been decisive" in light of the fact that the committee's deliberations were "brief, perhaps perfunctory" and none of the committee members could remember having considered the issue of the plaintiffs termination
Oliver v. Digital Equipment Corp.
846 F.2d 103 (1st Cir. 1988) Cited 413 times
Holding that discharge over two and one half years after employee filed EEOC complaint was insufficient showing of retaliation to avoid summary judgment for employer
Section 2000e-16 - Employment by Federal Government
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16 Cited 5,002 times 20 Legal Analyses
Adopting provisions of § 2000e-5(f)-(k), including that "[e]ach United States district court . . . shall have jurisdiction of actions brought under this subchapter"

Isaac J. Smith, Complainant, v. John McHugh, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

9 Cited authorities

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

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 an employer discriminated on the basis of sex when he "act[ed] on the basis of a belief that a woman cannot be aggressive, or that she must not be"

Holding that "oppos[ing]" any practice that the employee reasonably believes to be prohibited by Title VII is protected activity under that statue (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a))

Holding that coworker's frequently repeated comment that the plaintiff was an "old bitch" showed a discriminatory animus

Holding that discharge over two and one half years after employee filed EEOC complaint was insufficient showing of retaliation to avoid summary judgment for employer

Adopting provisions of § 2000e-5(f)-(k), including that "[e]ach United States district court . . . shall have jurisdiction of actions brought under this subchapter"