Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc.

Holding that, since the 58-year-old plaintiff was fired by his 60-year-old employer, there was an inference that "age discrimination was not the motive"

St. Mary's Honor Ctr. v. Hicks

Holding that a trier of fact may infer discrimination upon rejecting an employer's proffered reason for termination

Staub v. Proctor Hosp.

Holding that a person who "did not intend to cause dismissal" cannot be deemed "responsible" for the dismissal, even if the dismissal was the "result" or "foreseeable consequence" of the person's actions

Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Corp.

Holding that plaintiffs need show only that "a discriminatory purpose has been a motivating factor in the decision," because, after all, "[r]arely can it be said that a legislature or administrative body operating under a broad mandate made a decision motivated solely by a single concern, or even that a particular purpose was the ‘dominant’ or ‘primary’ one."

Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc.

Holding that an implied covenant "cannot be endowed with an existence independent of its contractual underpinnings. It cannot impose substantive duties or limits on the contracting parties beyond those incorporated in the specific terms of their agreement."

Farrell v. Planters Lifesavers Co.

Holding that the timing of appellant's termination was suggestive of causation for both the retaliation and the quid pro quo claims

Ray v. Henderson

Holding that for purposes of a Title VII retaliation claim, "an action is cognizable as an adverse employment action if it is reasonably likely to deter employees from engaging in protected activity"

Morgan v. Hilti, Inc.

Holding that the plaintiff failed to create an inference of pretext when the disciplinary actions "simply completed the disciplinary process already set in motion" before the plaintiff had engaged in protected speech

Kachmar v. Sungard Data Systems, Inc.

Holding that Congress did not intend to hold individual employees liable under Title VII, which is parallel to the ADEA in many ways

Porter v. Cal. Dept. of Corrs.

Holding that discrete, tangible employment actions could not be considered when evaluating a hostile work environment claim and stating that "if the flames of an allegedly hostile environment are to rise to the level of an actionable claim, they must do so on the fuel of timely non-discrete acts"

Section 151 - Findings and declaration of policy

Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"

Section 2601 - Congressional findings and purpose

Providing purpose of RESPA is "to effect certain changes in the settlement process for residential real estate"

Section 4617 - Authority over critically undercapitalized regulated entities

Granting the FHFA the power to “operate” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and “to conduct all [of their] business”

Section 2601 to 2604 - Repealed