Skip to main content
· 2/3/2016

Herman Hutton v. Danny Maynard, Sr.

Citations

  • 812 F.3d 679
  • 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 1774
  • 99 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 45,490
  • 128 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1157
  • 2016 WL 404070

How courts have described this case

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

  • setting forth the evidence necessary to survive a motion for summary judgment on a Title VII retaliation claim
  • finding no showing of pretext where plaintiff provided “no explanation as to why or how the named individuals were in any way similarly situated such that they should be considered valid comparators”
  • “If there is no direct evidence and an inference [of retaliation] is required, the familiar three-step burden-shifting analysis from McDonnell Douglas applies.”
  • to proceed under indirect method of proof, plaintiff must show causal connection

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Wollman, Colloton, Kelly

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.