Coast to Coast Energy, Inc. v. Gasarch

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that two months between protected activity and adverse action was not unduly 23 suggestive of retaliation
• finding two-month gap between the request for an accommodation and termination not unduly suggestive when there was no other evidence of causation
• “[I]t is unlikely that the use of a model jury instruction can constitute error.”
• “We hold that First State has waived this argument because of its continued acquiescence to Robinson’s case theory, its encouragement of the adoption of the very jury instruction to which it now objects, and its failure to include this error in its post-trial briefing.”
• “Waived arguments about jury instructions may not be resurrected on appeal.”
• two months is not unusually suggestive

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).