§Why CasetextPricing

Robinson v. District of Columbia

MOTION for Summary Judgment

32 Cited authorities

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 216,278 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"

  2. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio

    475 U.S. 574 (1986)   Cited 113,103 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them

  3. Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc.

    530 U.S. 133 (2000)   Cited 21,087 times   22 Legal Analyses
    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"

  4. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White

    548 U.S. 53 (2006)   Cited 11,240 times   104 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a jury could find a reassignment from a position with "an indication of prestige" to one involving less desirable responsibilities "would have been materially adverse to a reasonable employee"

  5. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green

    411 U.S. 792 (1973)   Cited 52,187 times   95 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

  6. St. Mary's Honor Ctr. v. Hicks

    509 U.S. 502 (1993)   Cited 12,256 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a trier of fact may infer discrimination upon rejecting an employer's proffered reason for termination

  7. Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth

    524 U.S. 742 (1998)   Cited 7,105 times   92 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer is not liable for a hostile work environment created by one of its employees when "the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any sexually harassing behavior, and . . . the plaintiff employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer or to avoid harm otherwise"

  8. Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins

    490 U.S. 228 (1989)   Cited 4,609 times   161 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer discriminated on the basis of sex when he "act[ed] on the basis of a belief that a woman cannot be aggressive, or that she must not be"

  9. Ford Motor Co. v. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n

    458 U.S. 219 (1982)   Cited 747 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a claimant need not “accept a demotion” in order to mitigate damages

  10. Brady v. Office of the Sergeant

    520 F.3d 490 (D.C. Cir. 2008)   Cited 1,051 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiff must show both that the "employer's asserted non-discriminatory reason was not the actual reason and that the employer intentionally discriminated" based on a protected characteristic

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,681 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Section 1981 - Equal rights under the law

    42 U.S.C. § 1981   Cited 37,868 times   236 Legal Analyses
    Granting equal rights to "make and enforce contracts" without regard to race

  13. Section 2-1401.01 - Intent of Council

    D.C. Code § 2-1401.01   Cited 282 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Protecting against discrimination on the basis of "race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, familial status, family responsibilities, matriculation, political affiliation, genetic information, disability, source of income, status as a victim of intrafamily offense, and place of residence or business"