Eugene W. Slattery v. Swiss Reinsurance America Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiff's prima facie case and evidence of pretext were not sufficient to survive defendant's motion for summary judgment
• holding that a company that “diminished [a plaintiff]’s job responsibilities a full five months prior to his filing of the EEOC charges” did not give rise to an inference of retaliation (emphasis in original)
• holding that the plaintiff failed to establish the causation element of the prima facie case for retaliation where “an extensive period of progressive discipline” began five months before the plaintiff filed his EEOC charges
• concluding that “adverse employment actions were both part, and the ultimate product, of ‘an extensive period of progressive discipline,’ which began when [defendant] diminished Slattery’s job responsibilities a full five months prior to his filing of the EEOC Charges”
• noting that timing cannot establish causation if “gradual adverse job actions began well before the plaintiff had ever engaged in any protected activity”
• noting that “where discharge is at issue and the employer has already hired the employee, the inference of minimal qualification is not difficult to draw”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).