Grant v. Bethlehem Steel 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 more than an eight- month gap between the filing of an EEOC complaint and a retaliatory action suggested a causal relationship
• holding that an eight-month gap between protected activity and an adverse action was not too great to infer a causal connection
• finding that the lapse of eight months between an EEOC complaint and retaliatory act indicated a causal connection”
• finding that the lapse of eight months between an EEOC complaint and retaliatory act indicated a causal connection
• holding more-than-eight-month gap between EEOC complaint and retaliatory action suggested a causal relationship
• describing causal connection as “a retaliatory motive playing a part in the adverse employment actions”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Grant v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Grant v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.
  Second Circuit· 1980-11-26· cited 80×
• Grant v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.
  Second Circuit· 1987-06-30· cited 56×