In re Seumanu

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a plaintiff terminated for \misuse of [an employer's] property\ could not rely on comparators allegedly guilty of \absenteeism\ and \insubordination\
• holding that the plaintiffs subjective skepticism regarding the truth of an employer’s representation does not raise a triable issue as to pretext
• holding that the plaintiff did not satisfy a prima facie test because he did not show he was treated differently than similarly-situated individuals
• holding that differentiating or mitigating circumstances must be considered when seeking to compare employee conduct or the employer’s treatment of it
• holding that a plaintiff terminated for “misuse of [an employer's] property” could not rely on comparators allegedly guilty of “absenteeism” and “insubordination”
• holding that a plaintiff terminated for “misuse of [an employer’s] property” could not rely on comparators allegedly guilty of “absenteeism” and “insubordination”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).