Federal Case

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that procedural and substantive inconsistencies by a PRC was evidence upon which a jury could find a “tenure denial was a product of discrimination”
• holding that discrimination claims under § 1981 and the PHRA involving disparate treatment are evaluated using the same burden-shifting framework
• explaining that McDonnell Douglas applies to claims of racial discrimination under Sections 1981 and 1983

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).