David Charles Sussman v. Department of Corrections

How courts have described this case

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

• acknowledging that Missouri courts apply McDonnell Douglas to the MHRA
• affidavit need not be disregarded when it mirrors other evidence that already establishes a fact dispute
• “[S]tray remarks in the workplace, statements by nondecisionmakers, and statements by decisionmakers unrelated to the decisional process do not constitute direct evidence.” (quoting Schierhoff v. GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare, L.P., 444 F.3d 961, 966 (8th Cir. 2006)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).