Forekap Associates v. Berman

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an African-American supervisor’s racially-biased comments about his White employees was circumstantial evidence to support an inference of racial discrimination
• finding that the “mosaic of circumstantial evidence revolves around credibility findings of not only [Supervisor] but other employees who were deposed or provided affidavits”
• explaining that “suspicious timing” may contribute to a finding of a convincing mosaic of circumstantial evidence
• noting that evidence which is “likely to be probative” of discrimination includes “systematically better treatment of similarly situated employees”
• explaining that “[t]he elements of a claim of race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 are also the same as a Title VII disparate treatment claim in the employment context” (citation omitted)
• analyzing plaintiff’s 42 U.S.C. § 1981 race discrimination claim first under the McDonnell Douglas frame- work and alternatively under the “convincing mosaic” method

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).