Cynthia J. Fisher, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Vassar College, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the defendant's real motivation for denying tenure may have been plaintiff's period of absence from academia, and that this motivation might have exposed the defendant to liability on other grounds
• holding that plaintiff’s gender-plus-child-care claim was not adequately supported by the evidence because she failed to compare the tenure experience of women who took leaves of absence for child rearing with the tenure experience of men who took similar leaves of absence
• stating that the way to prove sex discrimination “predicated on the detrimental effects of prolonged professional inactivity would be by comparing (a) the ... experience of women who took extended leaves of absence from their work (regardless of the reason), with (b
• reversing judgment in favor of plaintiff asserting an EPA claim because—although she and her better-paid male co-worker were both college professors—the plaintiff “never introduced evidence establishing that she and [her coworker] performed equivalent work”
• a plaintiff may not \gerrymander\ data to skew the results of statistical analyses in her favor
• district court erred by giving innocent statement a “jaundiced reading” that “place[d] a strain on the text” to allow an inference of bias

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).