Gen. Elec. Corp. v. COM. PA. HUM. R. COM.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that pragmatic considerations dictate that party with access to facts should bear burden of proof
• noting that pragmatic considerations dictate that party with access to facts should bear burden of proof
• evidence of practices prior to effective date of sex discrimination amendment admissible to establish state of mind
• evidence of practices prior to effective date of sex discrimination amendment admissible to establish state of mind
• Pomeroy J., joined by Eagen and O’Brien, JJ. — Chief Justice Jones dissented, and Manderino, Roberts and Nix, JJ. concurred in the result, and reached an issue not decided by Mr. Justice Pomeroy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).