Skip to main content
· 4/24/1989

Andrew P. Hebert v. The Mohawk Rubber Company

Citations

  • 872 F.2d 1104
  • 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 5478
  • 49 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 38,932
  • 49 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1051
  • 1989 WL 38344

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that an early retirement offer is distinguished from a discharge when the employee has the choice to remain employed
  • explaining that a plaintiff may make out a prima facie case for employment discrimination in cases involving workforce reductions by showing, among other things, \that he was purposefully or intentionally discriminated against as an individual\ (emphasis added)
  • listing employer’s failure to inform plaintiff of adverse feedback on his work as only one of many pieces of circumstantial evidence that the plaintiff submitted in addition to statistical evidence
  • finding sufficient ___ proof to survive summary judgment where the younger retained person \exactly\ conducted the work of riffed employee, with only minor modifications
  • listing employer's failure to inform plaintiff of adverse feedback on his work as only one of many pieces of circumstantial evidence that the plaintiff submitted in addition to statistical evidence
  • listing employer's failure to inform plaintiff of adverse feedback on his work as only one of many pieces of circumstantial evidence that the plaintiff submitted in addition to statistical evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Coffin, Breyer, Pettine

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.