§

Matilda C.,1 Complainant, v. Victoria A. Lipnic, Acting Chair, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Agency.

0720140027 (E.E.O.C. Jul. 31, 2018)
Matilda C.,1 Complainant, v. Victoria A. Lipnic, Acting Chair, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Agency.

4 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. 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"

  3. Loeb v. Textron, Inc.

    600 F.2d 1003 (1st Cir. 1979)   Cited 721 times
    Denying any such requirement

  4. Wrenn v. Gould

    808 F.2d 493 (6th Cir. 1987)   Cited 443 times
    Holding that an employer can consider factors external to a job description when selecting among qualified candidates