Petitioner, )

13 Cited authorities

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
411 U.S. 792 (1973) Cited 53,662 times 99 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
Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc.
510 U.S. 17 (1993) Cited 12,775 times 23 Legal Analyses
Holding that "no single factor is required" to show a hostile work environment, including "whether [the acts are] physically threatening"
St. Mary's Honor Ctr. v. Hicks
509 U.S. 502 (1993) Cited 12,458 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 20,319 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"
O'Connor v. Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp.
517 U.S. 308 (1996) Cited 2,100 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that inference of age discrimination cannot be drawn from “replacement of one worker with another worker insignificantly younger”
U.S. Postal Service Bd. of Govs. v. Aikens
460 U.S. 711 (1983) Cited 2,427 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
Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters
438 U.S. 567 (1978) Cited 2,188 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
Carson v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation
82 F.3d 157 (7th Cir. 1996) Cited 298 times
Holding that a race discrimination plaintiff need not establish he was replaced by a member of a different race but the "question instead is whether the plaintiff has established a logical reason to believe that the decision rests on a legally forbidden ground"
E.E.O.C. v. Alton Packaging Corp.
901 F.2d 920 (11th Cir. 1990) Cited 164 times
Holding manager's statement that "if it were his company he would not hire blacks" was direct evidence of discrimination in plaintiff's failure to promote claim; statement indicated "a decidedly negative attitude toward black people" on the part of a decisionmaker and there was "no reason to think [his] attitude differ[ed] from hiring to promotion"
Wilson v. Firestone Tire Rubber Co.
932 F.2d 510 (6th Cir. 1991) Cited 154 times
Holding that the prima facie question is not reviewed "since the matter proceeded to trial"

Petitioner, )

13 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 "no single factor is required" to show a hostile work environment, including "whether [the acts are] physically threatening"

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 inference of age discrimination cannot be drawn from “replacement of one worker with another worker insignificantly younger”

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

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 a race discrimination plaintiff need not establish he was replaced by a member of a different race but the "question instead is whether the plaintiff has established a logical reason to believe that the decision rests on a legally forbidden ground"

Holding that the prima facie question is not reviewed "since the matter proceeded to trial"