26 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 239,217 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
477 U.S. 317 (1986) Cited 218,869 times 40 Legal Analyses
Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
411 U.S. 792 (1973) Cited 52,803 times 96 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
Farrell v. Planters Lifesavers Co.
206 F.3d 271 (3d Cir. 2000) Cited 1,811 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the timing of appellant's termination was suggestive of causation for both the retaliation and the quid pro quo claims
Lichtenstein v. Univ. of Pittsburgh Med. Ctr.
691 F.3d 294 (3d Cir. 2012) Cited 726 times
Holding that whether the case could proceed under a mixed-motive instruction was not relevant because the case could proceed under "the more taxing McDonnell Douglas standard"
Watson v. Abington TP
478 F.3d 144 (3d Cir. 2007) Cited 760 times
Holding that in order to state a municipal policy, a plaintiff must allege "an official proclamation, policy, or edict"
McGreevy v. Stroup
413 F.3d 359 (3d Cir. 2005) Cited 777 times
Holding that retaliatory unsatisfactory employment rating infringed on employee's First Amendment rights
Willis v. Upmc Children's Hosp. of Pittsburgh
808 F.3d 638 (3d Cir. 2015) Cited 547 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that subjective belief that age discrimination occurred cannot support an inference of age discrimination for disparate treatment claim
Kachmar v. Sungard Data Systems, Inc.
109 F.3d 173 (3d Cir. 1997) Cited 929 times
Holding that Congress did not intend to hold individual employees liable under Title VII, which is parallel to the ADEA in many ways
Curtis v. Costco Wholesale Corp.
807 F.3d 215 (7th Cir. 2015) Cited 373 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that district court properly deemed facts admitted where opposing party failed to comply with Local Rule 56.1 by offering boilerplate objections rather than providing a clear denial and specific citations to evidence in the record
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 333,232 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 12101 - Findings and purpose
42 U.S.C. § 12101 Cited 23,791 times 65 Legal Analyses
Finding a pattern of " unnecessary discrimination and prejudice" that "costs the United States billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses resulting from dependency and nonproductivity"
Rule 1 - Scope and Purpose
Fed. R. Civ. P. 1 Cited 15,441 times 49 Legal Analyses
Recognizing the federal rules of civil procedure should be employed to promote the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding"
Section 2601 - Findings and purposes
29 U.S.C. § 2601 Cited 7,725 times 39 Legal Analyses
Finding that there is inadequate job security for employees who have serious health conditions that prevent them from working for temporary periods
Section 153 - National Railroad Adjustment Board
45 U.S.C. § 153 Cited 1,586 times
Stating that parties may void contracts in certain instances of unilateral mistake
Section 825.220 - Protection for employees who request leave or otherwise assert FMLA rights
29 C.F.R. § 825.220 Cited 1,768 times 43 Legal Analyses
Adopting a "negative factor" standard
Section 825.216 - Limitations on an employee's right to reinstatement
29 C.F.R. § 825.216 Cited 581 times 12 Legal Analyses
Explaining that employers are permitted to "deny restoration to employment" if they can "show that an employee would not otherwise have been employed at the time reinstatement is requested"

Lavorgna v. Norfolk Southern Corporation

26 Cited authorities

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

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

Holding that whether the case could proceed under a mixed-motive instruction was not relevant because the case could proceed under "the more taxing McDonnell Douglas standard"

Holding that in order to state a municipal policy, a plaintiff must allege "an official proclamation, policy, or edict"

Holding that retaliatory unsatisfactory employment rating infringed on employee's First Amendment rights

Holding that subjective belief that age discrimination occurred cannot support an inference of age discrimination for disparate treatment claim

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

Holding that district court properly deemed facts admitted where opposing party failed to comply with Local Rule 56.1 by offering boilerplate objections rather than providing a clear denial and specific citations to evidence in the record

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Finding a pattern of " unnecessary discrimination and prejudice" that "costs the United States billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses resulting from dependency and nonproductivity"

Recognizing the federal rules of civil procedure should be employed to promote the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding"

Finding that there is inadequate job security for employees who have serious health conditions that prevent them from working for temporary periods

Stating that parties may void contracts in certain instances of unilateral mistake

Adopting a "negative factor" standard

Explaining that employers are permitted to "deny restoration to employment" if they can "show that an employee would not otherwise have been employed at the time reinstatement is requested"