Skip to main content
· 6/30/1997

Bruce H. KING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TOWN OF HANOVER, Defendant-Appellee

Citations

  • 116 F.3d 965
  • 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 16007
  • 71 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 44,807
  • 74 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1266
  • 1997 WL 348819

How courts have described this case

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

  • “An at-will employee has no reasonable expectation of continued employment. Whether an employment contract allows dismissal only for cause is a matter of state law.”
  • “It is insufficient for [the plaintiff] to simply recount that he complained and that he was disciplined five months later. He must offer sufficient evidence of discrimination for a rational factfinder to find in his favor.”
  • “[A] 2 Duplisea’s substantive due process claim is rooted in the deprivation of a property interest. See Complaint ¶ 72 (“[The City] deprived [Duplisea] of his property interest by illegally terminating him without substantive due process of law.”
  • applying the McDonnell Douglas framework to Title VII claims

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Torruella, Selya, Saris

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.