Search for: "McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green"
Results 21 - 40
of 94
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Dec 2020, 4:00 am
” Courts test FMLA retaliation claims under the burden-shifting framework set forth in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2020, 4:46 pm
Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
14 May 2020, 4:00 am
As a cause of action for breach of contract accrues and the statute of limitations commences when the contract is breached and Petitioner did not file suit within one year of the alleged breach, the Circuit Court opined that his breach of contract claim was untimely.* McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
14 May 2020, 4:00 am
As a cause of action for breach of contract accrues and the statute of limitations commences when the contract is breached and Petitioner did not file suit within one year of the alleged breach, the Circuit Court opined that his breach of contract claim was untimely.* McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
19 Jul 2019, 9:23 am
(citing to McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
10 Jul 2019, 3:30 am
Apply the burden-shifting framework set forth in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
3 Jul 2019, 5:36 am
"Addressing a motion for summary judgment on behalf of NYPD and certain of its named staff members [City Defendants], the Appellate Division said that an action brought under the NYCHRL must be analyzed under both the framework of McDonnell Douglas Corp. v Green, 411 US 792, and under the newer mixed motive framework, which imposes a lesser burden on a plaintiff opposing such a motion," citing Persaud v Walgreens Co., 161 AD3d 1019. [read post]
3 Jul 2019, 5:36 am
"Addressing a motion for summary judgment on behalf of NYPD and certain of its named staff members [City Defendants], the Appellate Division said that an action brought under the NYCHRL must be analyzed under both the framework of McDonnell Douglas Corp. v Green, 411 US 792, and under the newer mixed motive framework, which imposes a lesser burden on a plaintiff opposing such a motion," citing Persaud v Walgreens Co., 161 AD3d 1019. [read post]
15 Jun 2019, 2:24 pm
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
17 Apr 2019, 4:00 am
Am., Inc., 715 F.3d 102.** McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
17 Apr 2019, 4:00 am
Am., Inc., 715 F.3d 102.** McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
26 Mar 2019, 6:40 am
She can do so in a variety of ways, one of which is by navigating the familiar burden-shifting framework established by the Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2019, 3:30 am
The Eleventh Circuit noted that a plaintiff who brings intentional-discrimination claims has several options available to her: [O]ne of which is by navigating the now-familiar three-part burden-shifting framework established by the Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
21 Mar 2019, 7:48 am
She can do so in a variety of ways, one of which is by navigating the now-familiar three-part burden-shifting framework established by the Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
13 Nov 2018, 3:21 pm
” The Tenth Circuit noted that some sister circuits have disagreed, but opined that those courts reached the wrong conclusion based on an erroneous interpretation of the burden-shifting framework set forth in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
16 Mar 2018, 8:28 pm
Hernandez, 540 U.S. 44, 49 (2003) (citing McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 7:13 am
Next, the Court conducts the three-part burden shifting analysis developed in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 7:13 am
Next, the Court conducts the three-part burden shifting analysis developed in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 7:13 am
Next, the Court conducts the three-part burden shifting analysis developed in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
20 Jul 2017, 12:43 pm
Under the “burden-shifting framework” of McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. [read post]
