17 Cited authorities

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
411 U.S. 792 (1973) Cited 52,162 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
Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins
507 U.S. 604 (1993) Cited 1,903 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that age and years of service, pension status, or seniority are "analytically distinct" and an employer may rely on one while ignoring the other
Kolstad v. Am. Dental Assn
527 U.S. 526 (1999) Cited 1,457 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employer may avoid punitive damages under § 1981a if it has made good-faith efforts to prevent discrimination in the workplace
L.A. Dept. of Water Power v. Manhart
435 U.S. 702 (1978) Cited 552 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employer's policy requiring female employees to make larger pension fund contributions than male employees was discriminatory on its face in violation of Title VII
Auto. Workers v. Johnson Controls, Inc.
499 U.S. 187 (1991) Cited 354 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding "the absence of a malevolent motive does not convert a facially discriminatory policy into a neutral policy with a discriminatory effect"
Romano v. U-Haul Intern
233 F.3d 655 (1st Cir. 2000) Cited 168 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the defendant employer is responsible for proving that it made good faith efforts to comply with the requirements of Title VII, and that the mere existence of an antidiscrimination policy was insufficient absent proof that the employer actually implemented the policy
El-Hakem v. BJY Inc.
415 F.3d 1068 (9th Cir. 2005) Cited 114 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that calling the plaintiff "Manny" every day for two months "and in emails at least twice a month thereafter" for approximately one year total despite the plaintiff's objections and requests to be called by his actual name, was sufficiently pervasive conduct to create a hostile work environment
Tramp v. Associated Underwriters, Inc.
768 F.3d 793 (8th Cir. 2014) Cited 67 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that a reasonable jury could find that an employer's desire to reduce health insurance costs was not “analytically distinct” from considerations of employee age
Deneen v. Nw. Airlines, Inc.
132 F.3d 431 (8th Cir. 1998) Cited 107 times
Holding that proof of discrimination offered by the plaintiff was insufficient to support a punitive damages award in light of the employer's belief that its actions were required by a collective bargaining agreement
Maldonado v. U.S. Bank
186 F.3d 759 (7th Cir. 1999) Cited 83 times
Holding that a supplemental affidavit cannot create a genuine issue of fact when the affidavit conflicts with prior deposition testimony without any suitable explanation
Section 2000e - Definitions
42 U.S.C. § 2000e Cited 51,471 times 129 Legal Analyses
Granting EEOC authority to issue procedural regulations to carry out Title VII provisions
Section 2000e-2 - Unlawful employment practices
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 Cited 28,248 times 169 Legal Analyses
Adopting case law prior to June 4, 1989, “with respect to the concept of ‘alternative employment practice’ ”

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Bob Evans Farms, Llc

17 Cited authorities

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 age and years of service, pension status, or seniority are "analytically distinct" and an employer may rely on one while ignoring the other

Holding that an employer may avoid punitive damages under § 1981a if it has made good-faith efforts to prevent discrimination in the workplace

Holding that an employer's policy requiring female employees to make larger pension fund contributions than male employees was discriminatory on its face in violation of Title VII

Holding "the absence of a malevolent motive does not convert a facially discriminatory policy into a neutral policy with a discriminatory effect"

Holding that the defendant employer is responsible for proving that it made good faith efforts to comply with the requirements of Title VII, and that the mere existence of an antidiscrimination policy was insufficient absent proof that the employer actually implemented the policy

Holding that a reasonable jury could find that an employer's desire to reduce health insurance costs was not “analytically distinct” from considerations of employee age

Holding that proof of discrimination offered by the plaintiff was insufficient to support a punitive damages award in light of the employer's belief that its actions were required by a collective bargaining agreement

Holding that a supplemental affidavit cannot create a genuine issue of fact when the affidavit conflicts with prior deposition testimony without any suitable explanation

Granting EEOC authority to issue procedural regulations to carry out Title VII provisions

Adopting case law prior to June 4, 1989, “with respect to the concept of ‘alternative employment practice’ ”