District of Columbia· 1/8/2015
Kilby-Robb v. Duncan
Citations
- 77 F. Supp. 3d 164
- 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1750
- 2015 WL 106956
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- applying this standard to find that Kilby-Robb was not “significantly better qualified” than the candidate selected for a different position in 2005
- granting summary judgment for the Department on race and age discrimination nonselection claims and denying summary judgment on retaliation claims
- “procedural irregularities in the selection process also may demonstrate that the employer’s justification for a hiring or promotion decision was pretex-tual.” (citing Hamilton, 666 F.3d at 1355)
- Huh Aff. ¶¶ 12, 14
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Judge Christopher R. Cooper
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Román v. CastroDistrict of Columbia· 2016-03-01· cited 29×
- Etokie v. DuncanDistrict of Columbia· 2016-07-29· cited 14×
- Uzoukwu v. Metropolitan Washington Council of GovernmentsDistrict of Columbia· 2015-09-18· cited 12×
- Thompson v. ShinsekiDistrict of Columbia· 2016-03-14· cited 11×
- Kilby-Robb v. DeVosDistrict of Columbia· 2017-03-30· cited 9×
- Craig v. MnuchinDistrict of Columbia· 2017-09-29· cited 7×
- Drielak v. McCarthyDistrict of Columbia· 2016-09-19· cited 6×
- Kilby-Robb v. DuncanDistrict of Columbia· 2016-09-28· cited 5×
- Morris v. Carter Goble Lee, Inc.District of Columbia· 2015-07-10· cited 4×
- Vasser v. ShinsekiDistrict of Columbia· 2017-11-22· cited 3×
- Chudson v. WattDistrict of Columbia· 2015-08-31· cited 3×
- Roman v. DonovanDistrict of Columbia· 2016-03-01
- Wanda Savage v. Sylvia BurwellDistrict of Columbia· 2016-08-03
- Guillen-Perez v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia· 2019-11-26
- Brisbon v. PoteatDistrict of Columbia· 2022-11-08
Cites
29 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court· 1986-06-25· cited 135,235×
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court· 1986-06-25· cited 119,442×
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court· 1973-05-14· cited 38,518×
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court· 1981-03-04· cited 15,585×
- Scott v. HarrisSupreme Court· 2007-04-30· cited 13,305×
- University of Tex. Southwestern Medical Center v. NassarSupreme Court· 2013-06-24· cited 3,582×
- Holcomb, Christine v. Powell, DonaldD.C. Circuit· 2006-01-10· cited 1,529×
- Brady v. Office of the Sergeant at ArmsD.C. Circuit· 2008-03-28· cited 1,336×
- Etim U. Aka v. Washington Hospital CenterD.C. Circuit· 1998-10-09· cited 1,302×
- Ross J. Laningham v. United States NavyD.C. Circuit· 1987-03-17· cited 1,192×
- Ronald J. Fischbach v. District of Columbia Department of Corrections and Hallem H. Williams, Jr.D.C. Circuit· 1996-07-15· cited 586×
- Gary Hamilton v. Timothy GeithnerD.C. Circuit· 2012-01-17· cited 438×
- Woodruff, Phillip v. Peters, MaryD.C. Circuit· 2007-04-06· cited 393×
- Gaujacq v. EDF, Inc.D.C. Circuit· 2010-04-09· cited 163×
- Krodel v. YoungD.C. Circuit· 1984-11-20· cited 149×
- Hall, Marvin W. v. Giant Food IncD.C. Circuit· 1999-05-25· cited 123×
- Sarah M. Goostree, (84-5752), (84-5869) v. State of Tennessee, Montgomery County, Tennessee, (84-5869), Montgomery County Quarterly Court, (84-5752)Sixth Circuit· 1986-07-17· cited 117×
- Winston v. CloughDistrict of Columbia· 2010-05-11· cited 99×
- Glass v. LaHoodDistrict of Columbia· 2011-05-20· cited 73×
- Dudley v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict of Columbia· 2013-02-20· cited 64×
Other cases named Kilby-Robb v. Duncan
2 other CourtListener records share this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.