Christine Evans v. Technologies Applications & Service Company

How courts have described this case

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

• providing that an employer may choose from equally qualified candidates “ ‘provided the decision is not based upon unlawful criteria ’ ”
• noting that because same person hired and fired plaintiff, powerful inference arose that decision not motivated by discriminatory animus
• affirming dismissal of age discrimination claim where the charge only alleged sex discrimination, holding that “age discrimination does not necessarily flow from sex discrimination and vice versa”
• discussing plaintiffs burden in the context of a sexual harassment charge
• “[E]mployee qualifications are widely recognized as valid, non-discriminatory bases for any adverse employment decision.”
• employee’s unsubstantiated allegations and bald assertions concerning her own qualifications and shortcomings of co-workers fail to disprove employer’s explanation or show discrimination

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).