Cnty. of Durham v. Orr

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that evidence of employer's intent to discriminate on the basis of age could be direct evidence, such as a paper with the notation \Lay-Off--Too Old\ beside a plaintiff's name, or circumstantial evidence such as statistics or evidence of employer subterfuge
• noting that evidence of employer’s intent to discriminate on the basis of age could be direct evidence, such as a paper with the notation “Lay-Off — Too Old” beside a plaintiff’s name, or circumstantial evidence such as statistics or evidence of employer subterfuge
• Unit B decisions are binding precedent in this circuit. Stein v. Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33, 34 (11th Cir.1982)
• “[Seniority and age discrimination are unrelated.. . . We state without equivocation that the seniority a given plaintiff has accumulated entitles him to no better or worse treatment in an age discrimination suit”
• \[S]eniority and age discrimination are unrelated. . . . We state without equivocation that the seniority a given plaintiff has accumulated entitles him to no better or worse treatment in an age discrimination suit\
• scrap of paper on which was written “Too old-Lay Off” constituted direct evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).