Barbara Kragor v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that summary judgment on employee's age discrimination claim was inappropriate where employer had testified she was \exceptional\ and that \she had done nothing wrong\ after firing her for violating a company policy
• holding that, where a plaintiff chooses to attack the veracity of the employer’s proffered reason, the inquiry into pretext is limited to deciding “whether the employer gave an honest explanation of its behavior”
• reversing grant of summary judgment to employer where plaintiff raised genuine issue of pretext by providing evidence of statement by final decisionmaker that permitted reasonable interpretation that employer’s “proffered nondiscriminatory reason was a cover-up for discrimination”
• finding evidence of pretext where “the employer’s actual decisionmaker, after terminating an employee for misconduct (or the appearance of misconduct), says without qualification that the employee is exceptional, did nothing wrong, did everything right, and should not have been fired”
• “When the employer’s actual deci-sionmaker, after terminating an employee for misconduct (or the appearance of misconduct
• “[The] inquiry is limited to whether the employer gave an honest explanation of its behavior.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).