Baker v. Potter

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a nonmoving party may not rely solely on allegations or conclusory statements
• finding that a “two-month gap [was] not sufficient to establish the temporal proximity necessary to show a causal connection”
• finding that a “two-month gap [was] not sufficient to establish the temporal proximity necessary to show a causal connection”
• finding that a two-month gap could not support an inference of causation
• holding two months could be too long in many circumstances
• denying summary judgment to employer 17 when description of position did not include employer’s asserted essential functions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).