Charles R. Pottenger v. Potlatch Corporation, a Delaware Corporation

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 “policy of committing employment 2 decisions in a RIF to the subjective discretion of its managers constitute[s] a specific employment 3 practice”
• “Without more ... the fact that [the replacement] was younger than [the terminated employee] does not create a triable issue of pretext.”
• “Summary judgment is appropriate BUDNICK v. TOWN OF CAREFREE 2321 when statistics do not support a disparate impact analysis.”
• “Without more . . . the fact that Nelson[, the replacement,] was younger than Pottenger[, the terminated employee,] does not create a triable issue of pretext.”
• summary judgment is appropriate when statistics do not support a disparate impact analysis
• “Nor does the fact that the company moved a younger employee ahead of Pottenger on the CEO successor list suggest that [the company] acted with any discriminatory motive, for that employee had held a higher position in the company than Pottenger”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).