§
Seattle Seahawks

18 Cited authorities

  1. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green

    411 U.S. 792 (1973)   Cited 53,594 times   98 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

  2. Mt. Healthy City Board of Ed. v. Doyle

    429 U.S. 274 (1977)   Cited 9,244 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding if a plaintiff can show a prima facie case of First Amendment retaliation, the district court should go on to determine whether the defendant has shown "by a preponderance of the evidence that it would have reached the same decision ... even in the absence of the protected conduct"

  3. U.S. Postal Service Bd. of Govs. v. Aikens

    460 U.S. 711 (1983)   Cited 2,426 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

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 657 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."

  5. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 358 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  6. Miller v. Universal City Studios, Inc.

    650 F.2d 1365 (5th Cir. 1981)   Cited 186 times
    Holding that providing a witness transcribed portions of another witness’s testimony in preparation for his court appearance constitutes a violation of Rule 615

  7. Labor Board v. Electrical Workers

    346 U.S. 464 (1953)   Cited 125 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Upholding discharge where employees publicly disparaged quality of employer's product, with no discernible relationship to pending labor dispute

  8. United States v. Womack

    654 F.2d 1034 (5th Cir. 1981)   Cited 50 times
    Rejecting assertion that federal statute regulating explosives lacked "adequate standards," given that the statute "carefully define[d] the term ‘explosives’ ... and an illustrative list of subject explosives [wa]s provided"

  9. United States v. Smith

    578 F.2d 1227 (8th Cir. 1978)   Cited 54 times
    Holding that Rule 615 was not violated when a police officer took notes during the trial and relayed them to witnesses waiting to testify because the sequestration order was limited to witnesses' exclusion from the courtroom

  10. United States v. Schaefer

    299 F.2d 625 (7th Cir. 1962)   Cited 81 times
    In Schaefer, the federal Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit interpreted Holder as meaning that a trial court "may not disqualify the witness merely because he disobeys the rule but that this alternative is available if particular circumstances are shown.... [W]e interpret these particular circumstances to mean some indication the witness was in court with `the consent, connivance, procurement or knowledge of the appellant or his counsel.