Joseph L. RAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CF INDUSTRIES, INCORPORATED, and Robert C. Liuzzi, Defendants-Appellees

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that since the employer's policy did not obligate the employer to communicate problems, the failure to do so does not constitute evidence of pretext
• holding that since the employer’s policy did not obligate the employer to communicate problems, the failure to do so does not constitute evidence of pretext
• noting that something more than hunches and speculation is necessary to survive summary judgment
• noting that something more than hunches and speculation is necessary to survive summary judgment
• rejecting plaintiff's argument that his employer's proffered reasons for his termination were pretextual because the employer never documented or communicated his performance problems
• rejecting plaintiffs argument that his employer’s proffered reasons for his termination were pretextual because the employer never documented or communicated his performance problems

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).