Lewis-Kures v. Edward R. Walsh & Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[c]laims under the ADEA are typically analyzed within the framework set forth in McDonnell Douglas” where the plaintiff presents no direct evidence of discrimination
• stating that the plaintiff did not present proof that “anyone connected with the decisions to demote or terminate him may any such age-based comments”
• noting that claims not pursued on appeal will typically be considered abandoned
• finding that “allegedly discriminatory comments made by company officials who had nothing to do with Bush’s termination, or alleged conduct by Bush’s supervisors that was either remote in time or of unarticulated relevance” could not establish pretext
• discounting allegedly “ageist” comments made by plaintiffs supervisors that were “remote in time”
• “Statements by non-decision makers . . . cannot suffice to satisfy the plaintiff’s burden of demonstrating animus.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).