Jimmie Huff v. Uarco, Incorporated, William M. Schoolman v. Uarco, Incorporated, and the Trustees of the Uarco Retirement Plan

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that failure to follow company layoff policy supports inference of discrimination
• stating that “evidence of racial hostility, if demonstrated, might still be rele vant to show that the reasons given for the plaintiffs discharge were merely pretextual”
• denying defendant's motion for summary judgment because comments that explicitly referenced employees' ages did not \stand alone\; company also violated its own policy when it terminated plaintiffs
• finding employer not entitled to summary judgment on disparate- treatment claim because the early retirement policy “draws an express line between workers over fifty-five and those under”
• adopting the reasoning of Schaffner and analyzing plaintiff’s evidence under McDonnell Douglas
• “evidence of the decisionmaker’s discriminatory motive regarding one employment decision may be used as evidence of that decisionmaker’s discriminatory motive in a similar employment decision.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).