Ramiro Tellez, Complainant, v. R.L. Brownlee, Acting Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

6 Cited authorities

Tex. Dept. of Cmty. Affairs v. Burdine
450 U.S. 248 (1981) Cited 20,322 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"
Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
340 U.S. 474 (1951) Cited 9,712 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 "
Pullman-Standard v. Swint
456 U.S. 273 (1982) Cited 1,630 times 5 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"
Wrenn v. Gould
808 F.2d 493 (6th Cir. 1987) Cited 449 times
Holding that an employer can consider factors external to a job description when selecting among qualified candidates
Bauer v. Bailar
647 F.2d 1037 (10th Cir. 1981) Cited 81 times
Holding employer's subjective hiring criteria to be nonpretextual where the subjective factors considered were articulated and generally relevant to the job
Canham v. Oberlin College
666 F.2d 1057 (6th Cir. 1981) Cited 10 times
In Canham v. Oberlin College, 666 F.2d 1057 (6th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 977, 102 S.Ct. 2242, 72 L.Ed.2d 851 (1982), the claim was sex discrimination.

Ramiro Tellez, Complainant, v. R.L. Brownlee, Acting Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

6 Cited authorities

Tex. Dept. of Cmty. Affairs v. Burdine

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"

Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

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 "

Pullman-Standard v. Swint

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"

Wrenn v. Gould

Holding that an employer can consider factors external to a job description when selecting among qualified candidates

Bauer v. Bailar

Holding employer's subjective hiring criteria to be nonpretextual where the subjective factors considered were articulated and generally relevant to the job

Canham v. Oberlin College

In Canham v. Oberlin College, 666 F.2d 1057 (6th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 977, 102 S.Ct. 2242, 72 L.Ed.2d 851 (1982), the claim was sex discrimination.