Greg Burley v. National Passenger Rail Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the analysis is the same for Title VII and DCHRA claims and that “Title VII claims and DCHRA claims thus rise and fall together”
• finding that a train accident that involved a derailment was not similar to other accidents that did not involve derailments
• explaining that a “similarly situated” individual must be “nearly identical” in “all of the relevant aspects” (citation omitted)
• noting that, to rely on comparator evidence to show pretext, a plaintiff must show that “all of the relevant aspects” of the relevant “employment situation[s] were nearly identical”
• acknowledging that as a general matter, “the mere fact that two employees had different titles and duties does not necessarily undermine the probative value of their different treatment”
• explaining that plaintiffs and proper comparators must have “similar[ ]” “jobs and job duties”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).