Holland v. Gee

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a permanent reassignment with “significantly different duties” and a reduction in both prestige and responsibility would suffice (emphasis added)
• providing that to show pretext, a plaintiff “cannot recast the reason but must meet it head on and rebut it” (quotation marks omitted)
• explaining that to demonstrate pretext, a plaintiff “can- not recast the reason but must meet it head on and rebut it”
• concluding decisionmaker’s false denial that he knew plaintiff was pregnant could lead a jury to make an adverse credibility determination and find pregnancy was a motivating factor for termination
• finding that transfer to less technical and more administrative role was adverse
• affirming the jury’s finding that a transfer constituted an adverse action because there was sufficient evidence that “the transfer was a permanent reassignment with significantly different duties.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).