Ali v. District of Columbia Government

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that materials are admissible if “offered to show that certain statements were made or to establish the effect of those statements on their recipients”
• finding that “criticism from a supervisor that does not affect a subordinate’s employment status or opportunities is not adverse action”
• denying the defendant’s motion for summary judgment of third-party retaliation claim brought by the “best friend” of the individual who engaged in protected conduct
• denying employer's request for summary judgment because a reasonable juror could believe that threatening claimant's best friend with termination would deter claimant from pursuing a discrimination complaint
• “Rule 56 allows a party . . . opposing 11 summary judgment to object that the material cited to support or dispute a fact cannot be presented in a form that would be admissible in evidence.”
• “Rule 56 allows a party . . . opposing summary judgment to object that the material cited to support or dispute a fact cannot be presented in a form that would be admissible in evidence.” (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(2)) (quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).