Abraham WELDON, Appellant, v. KRAFT, INC.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, under WPCL, a suspended employee who was then terminated had no right to wages during suspension because there was no contractual or implied contractual obligation to pay wages during suspension unless employee was reinstated
• holding plaintiff must show \others not in the protected class were treated more favorably\
• explaining that “there is no rule of law that the testimony of a discrimination plaintiff, standing alone, can never make out a case of discrimination that could withstand a summary judgment motion”
• rejecting argument that plaintiff was not qualified because it was “intertwined with” employer’s claim that plaintiff’s poor performance caused his termination
• affirming grant of summary judgment on WPCL claim where there was no express or implied contractual obligation to pay certain wages
• courts should be sensitive to myriad of ways such an inference can be created

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).