Danny and Deborah Flanagan v. Tammy Bryan and James Wade Smith

How courts have described this case

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

• no inference of dis- crimination where record contained comments over the course of years and complaints consistent with rationale em- ployer gave for plaintiff’s termination
• “[W]hen the basis for the termination is objectively unworthy of belief, a jury may infer pretext”
• “[T]he court ‘is not a super personnel department that second-guesses employers’ business judgments.’” (quoting Grant v. Trustees of Indiana Univ., 870 F.3d 562, 570 (7th Cir. 2017))
• “[T]he court ‘is not a super personnel de- partment that second-guesses employers’ business judg- ments.’” (quoting Grant v. Trs. of Ind. Univ., 870 F.3d 562, 570 (7th Cir. 2017))
• “If, however, the deficiencies that triggered the termination involved the type of conduct deemed significant to the employer in past evaluations, that would tend to support the employer’s claim that the claim of deficient performance was genuinely believed.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).