Arthur S. ANDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BAXTER HEALTHCARE CORP., Defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that terminating an employee to reduce salary costs is not age discrimination; although compensation level is often correlated with age, it is analytically distinct, and is not necessarily “age-based”
• observing that litigant seeking equitable tolling must show, inter alia, that “extraordinary circumstances” stood in his way, and a “‘garden variety claim of excusable neglect’ is not enough” (quoting Irwin v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 498 U.S. 89, 96 (1990))
• reading Hicks as adopting a pretext-only and not a pretext-plus rule
• to defeat summary judgment, Title VII plaintiff \must only `produce evidence from which a rational factfinder could infer that the company lied' about its proffered reasons for his dismissal\ (citation omitted)
• “The mere submission of materials from a co-worker or supervisor indicating that an employee’s performance is satisfactory … does not create a material issue of fact.”
• “The mere submission of materials from a co-worker or supervisor indicating that an employee’s performance is satisfactory . . . does not create a material issue of fact.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).