Deborah S. Goosby v. Johnson & Johnson Medical, Inc

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that since the analysis required for adjudicating a PHRA claim is identical to a Title VII inquiry “we therefore do not need to separately address” the PHRA claim
• affirming summary judgment on discrimination claim where plaintiff was terminated while on disability leave but failed to comply with her employer’s short term disability policy
• stating similar elements applicable to disparate treatment theory under Title VII
• identifying “drive,” “special knowledge,” and “initiative” as examples of subjective criteria
• “Subjective evaluations are more susceptible of abuse and more likely to mask pretext.” (quotation marks omitted)
• “[I]t is conceivable that an employer who harbors a discriminatory animus may nevertheless allow one or two females to advance for the sake of appearances.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).