Carole Tingle v. Arbors at Hilliard

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that an employee’s “bare assertion that the employer’s proffered reason has no basis in fact” is insufficient to establish pretext
• finding sufficient an investigation that included a manager’s personal knowledge of the events in question
• “The employer’s claim of honest belief is necessarily tied to the nature of its investigation and disciplinary decision process”
• “[W]e have never regarded those categories as anything more than a convenient way of marshaling evidence . . . .”
• “The employer’s claim of honest belief is necessarily tied to the nature of its investigation and disciplinary decision process.”
• “[A]t bottom the question is always whether the employer made up its stated reason to conceal intentional retaliation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).