Elizabeth Steger v. General Electric Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that statements by nondecisionmakers or by those unrelated to the relevant decision-making process will not satisfy the employee’s burden
• observing that a “general prac- tice” is not a legitimate factor other than sex (internal quotation marks omitted)
• explaining that, if plaintiff establishes a prima facie case, employer has burden of presenting a reason for pay difference other than plaintiffs sex, which plaintiff then may rebut as pretext for a sex-based differential in pay
• applying IMPACT to deem inadequate defendant's general statement that employment decision was predicated on hiring of best qualified applicant
• permitting affirmative defenses first raised at pretrial conference where plaintiff first objected on appeal
• finding the district court correctly precluded statements from non- decisionmakers as irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial since “statements by non- decisionmakers, or statements by decisionmakers unrelated to the decisional process” at issue will not satisfy the employee’s burden

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).