Hamilton v. Oklahoma City University

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting the argument that “an employer’s departure from the stated criteria in a job announcement should invariably create an inference of pretext”
• rejecting the argument that “an employer’s departure from the stated criteria in a job announcement should invariably create an inference of pretext”
• noting that courts should only “draw an inference of pretext where the facts assure [it] that the plaintiff is better qualified than the other candidates for the position.” (quoting Santana v. City & Cnty. of Denver, 488 F.3d 860, 865 (10th Cir. 2007))
• proof that employer hired or promoted someone outside protected class sufficient to show adverse employment action occurred under circumstances which give rise to inference of unlawful discrimination

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).