James Lyon, James E. Romick v. Ohio Education Association and Professional Staff Union

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 practice’s disparate effect on a protected group is insufficient evidence of discriminatory intent
• noting that ”[t]here was no evidence that either defen-danl intended ... to discriminate against older employees”
• stating that plaintiffs have not “alleged that [defendants were] aware of a disparate effect on older employees, such that we could infer intent from knowledge.”
• stating that plaintiffs have not “alleged that [defendants were] aware of a disparate effect on older employees, such that we could infer intent from knowledge.”
• discussing disparate treatment and disparate impact claims under the ADEA
• noting doubt as to disparate impact theory

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).