Casna v. City of Loves Park

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 one-day time period between the employee’s complaint and her supervisor’s recommendation to fire her was sufficient
• holding that the fact that plaintiff was terminated the same day she complained created genuine issue of material fact as to causation
• holding that adverse impact occurring \the very day after\ the protected activity was one of the rare cases where suspicious timing alone was enough to create a triable issue
• holding that where an employer recommended termination the day after plaintiff’s protected activity, “[a] fact-finder must determine whether” she was terminated because of that activity or “because her work performance was inadequate”
• holding that a trial was required on a retaliation claim where co-worker’s perceived “inconsistencies” in the plaintiff’s hearing abilities and asked “[h]ow can you work [in a clerical position] if you cannot hear?”
• holding that asking whether something is discriminatory is protected activity

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).