19 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 235,819 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 215,979 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"
Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio
475 U.S. 574 (1986) Cited 112,942 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
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
411 U.S. 792 (1973) Cited 52,115 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
Perry v. Woodward
199 F.3d 1126 (10th Cir. 1999) Cited 714 times
Holding that when a plaintiff alleges direct evidence of discrimination, the plaintiff must establish a nexus between the allegedly discriminatory comments and the termination
Kendall v. Watkins
998 F.2d 848 (10th Cir. 1993) Cited 421 times
Holding that "a series of letters" is insufficient to present an adequate claim to an agency for the purposes of the FTCA if they do not state a claim for a sum certain
Mackey v. Shalala
360 F.3d 463 (4th Cir. 2004) Cited 270 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the plaintiff's allegation of preselection, even if true, did not entitle a jury to conclude that its proffered explanation — that the candidate was better qualified — was a pretext for unlawful discrimination
Goldberg v. B. Green and Co., Inc.
836 F.2d 845 (4th Cir. 1988) Cited 418 times
Holding evidence showing that treatment was "arbitrary" was insufficient where "it [did] not reflect any intent to discriminate on the basis of age"
Geraci v. Moody-Tottrup, Intern., Inc.
82 F.3d 578 (3d Cir. 1996) Cited 287 times
Holding plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of pregnancy discrimination even though she told six co-workers she was pregnant where she could not provide any evidence the person who decided to terminate her employment knew she was pregnant
Hall v. U.S. Dept. of Labor
476 F.3d 847 (10th Cir. 2007) Cited 170 times
Rejecting a direct evidence claim where the identified testimony provided “no explicit nexus” between the protected activity and the adverse employment decision
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 328,160 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 455:10-1-1 - Purpose
Okla. Admin. Code § 455:10-1-1
The rules in this Chapter are the administrative rules of the Oklahoma Merit Protection Commission (Commission) which govern appeals and associated processes before the Commission. These rules establish procedures and standards necessary for the Commission to perform its duties and functions. The Commission has adopted the rules in this Chapter. The Administrator of the Human Capital Management Division of the Office of Management and Enterprise Services has adopted the rules which are in OAC 260

Taghavi v. Oklahoma Tax Commission

19 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 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

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 when a plaintiff alleges direct evidence of discrimination, the plaintiff must establish a nexus between the allegedly discriminatory comments and the termination

Holding that "a series of letters" is insufficient to present an adequate claim to an agency for the purposes of the FTCA if they do not state a claim for a sum certain

Holding that the plaintiff's allegation of preselection, even if true, did not entitle a jury to conclude that its proffered explanation — that the candidate was better qualified — was a pretext for unlawful discrimination

Holding evidence showing that treatment was "arbitrary" was insufficient where "it [did] not reflect any intent to discriminate on the basis of age"

Holding plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of pregnancy discrimination even though she told six co-workers she was pregnant where she could not provide any evidence the person who decided to terminate her employment knew she was pregnant

Rejecting a direct evidence claim where the identified testimony provided “no explicit nexus” between the protected activity and the adverse employment decision

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