Skip to main content
Third Circuit· 8/1/1994

Armbruster v. Unisys Corp.

Citations

  • 32 F.3d 768
  • 1994 WL 394670

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that documents prepared by the defendant that contained age notations, birth dates and/or dates of hire may have been related to the adverse employment decision, and therefore, the documents may be introduced as evidence of pretext
  • instructing that, in reviewing a motion for summary judgment, a court must view the facts in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and draw all inferences in that party’s favor
  • inference of age discrimination supported by transfer of older employees to a new group which was subsequently terminated
  • comments that employees to be transferred should be “senior people;” should be moved out of their offices quickly; and “should have seen the writing on the wall”
  • \an ultimate finding of illegal discrimination in a pretext case requires evidence showing a prima facie case and evidence showing pretext\
  • “In an ADEA case within the pretext framework, the plaintiff has retained the burden of persuading the jury that age actually played a role in the adverse employment decision and had a determinative influence on the outcome.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

255 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

28 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Armbruster v. Unisys Corp.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

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.