Clara Patrick v. Tom Ridge, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that McDonnell Douglas does not preclude an employer from relying on subjective reasons for its personnel decisions
• holding that the employer must articulate a relatively “specific” reason “in some detail,” and finding insufficient the employer’s proffered reason because it was “bald and amorphous”
• “[A] defendant employer must articulate in some detail a more specific reason than its own vague and conclusional feeling about the employee.”
• “We hold as a matter of law that justifying an adverse employment decision by offering a content-less and nonspecific statement . . . is not specific enough to meet a defendant employer's burden of production under McDonnell Douglas. It is, at bottom, a nonreason.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).