DeJung v. Superior Court

How courts have described this case

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

• clarifying that “FEHA expressly makes public employers, like private employers, directly liable for violations of that law”
• noting that California 25 courts have adopted the cat’s paw theory
• noting direct evidence \consists of statements by a decisionmaker that directly reflect the alleged animus and bear squarely on the contested employment decision\
• direct evidence of age discrimination where the employer expressly told plaintiff they would not hire him because they were “looking for someone younger”
• “‘Direct’ evidence refers only to evidence (such as racist or sexist statements) that 22 proves the fact of discriminatory animus without the need for substantial inference.”
• “‘Direct’ evidence refers only to evidence (such as racist or sexist statements) that 22 proves the fact of discriminatory animus without the need for substantial inference.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).