26 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 242,806 times 39 Legal Analyses
Holding that summary judgment is appropriate when the evidence is "so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law"
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
477 U.S. 317 (1986) Cited 221,957 times 41 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 53,523 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
Farrell v. Planters Lifesavers Co.
206 F.3d 271 (3d Cir. 2000) Cited 1,864 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 750 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 781 times
Holding that in order to state a municipal policy, a plaintiff must allege "an official proclamation, policy, or edict"
Willis v. Upmc Children's Hosp. of Pittsburgh
808 F.3d 638 (3d Cir. 2015) Cited 572 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that subjective belief that age discrimination occurred cannot support an inference of age discrimination for disparate treatment claim
McGreevy v. Stroup
413 F.3d 359 (3d Cir. 2005) Cited 786 times
Holding that retaliatory unsatisfactory employment rating infringed on employee's First Amendment rights
Kachmar v. Sungard Data Systems, Inc.
109 F.3d 173 (3d Cir. 1997) Cited 945 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 387 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 338,431 times 161 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 24,354 times 67 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 16,016 times 52 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 7,840 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 1,599 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 1,787 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 585 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 appropriate when the evidence is "so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law"

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

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

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"