Doris M. Ineichen v. Ameritech

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “later-filed contradictory affidavits” cannot create “‘sham’ issues of fact with affidavits that contradict their prior depositions”
• holding that defendant was entitled to summary judgment because plaintiff failed to present any evidence that defendant's proffered reason was a lie
• noting that “it is not the court’s concern that an employer may … be too hard on its employee”
• finding that supervisor disapproved of the relationship because it affected the employee’s productivity, not because the relationship was interracial
• reiterating rule that a party may not create an issue of fact with an affidavit containing conclusions that contradict depositions or other sworn testimony
• “the only question is whether the employer’s proffered reason was pretextual, meaning that it was a lie”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).