Ralph J. Perez, Complainant, v. Aida Alvarez, Administrator, U.S. Small Business Administration, Agency.

8 Cited authorities

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
411 U.S. 792 (1973) Cited 52,406 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 12,283 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 19,997 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"
U.S. Postal Service Bd. of Govs. v. Aikens
460 U.S. 711 (1983) Cited 2,406 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
Berry v. Board of Sup'rs of L.S.U
715 F.2d 971 (5th Cir. 1983) Cited 523 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding mere allegation that a female professor was paid less than a male colleague for equal work stated a claim under the EPA
Sabree v. United Broth., Carpenters Joiners
921 F.2d 396 (1st Cir. 1990) Cited 173 times
Holding that a knowing plaintiff has an obligation to file promptly or lose his claim as "distinguished from a plaintiff who is unable to appreciate that he is being discriminated against until he has lived through a series of acts and is thereby able to perceive the overall discriminatory pattern."
Day v. Mathews
530 F.2d 1083 (D.C. Cir. 1976) Cited 101 times
In Day v. Mathews, 530 F.2d 1083 (D.C. Cir. 1976), there was conceded proof that the Department of Health, Education and Welfare had treated Mr. Day's applications for promotion in discriminatory fashion.
Scott v. Claytor
469 F. Supp. 22 (D.D.C. 1978) Cited 11 times
Holding that three denied promotions over the course of three years, where the decisions were made by three different selection officials and involved different qualifications were not sufficiently related to constitute a continuing violation

Ralph J. Perez, Complainant, v. Aida Alvarez, Administrator, U.S. Small Business Administration, Agency.

8 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 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 mere allegation that a female professor was paid less than a male colleague for equal work stated a claim under the EPA

In Day v. Mathews, 530 F.2d 1083 (D.C. Cir. 1976), there was conceded proof that the Department of Health, Education and Welfare had treated Mr. Day's applications for promotion in discriminatory fashion.

Holding that three denied promotions over the course of three years, where the decisions were made by three different selection officials and involved different qualifications were not sufficiently related to constitute a continuing violation