Sixth Circuit· 8/15/2007

Lindsay v. Yates

Citations

498 F.3d 434
2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 19338
2007 WL 2316626

How courts have described this case

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

holding that plaintiffs-purchasers properly pleaded a Section 1981 claim by alleging that (1) sellers advertised their house for sale; (2) plaintiffs signed a purchase agreement and made a deposit; and (3
restating holding in Swierkiewicz that “an employment-discrimination plaintiff satisfies her pleading burden by drafting a ‘short and plain statement of the claim’ consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a).”
noting Swierkiewicz’s holding that “an employment-discrimination plaintiff satisfies her pleading burden by drafting a short and plain statement of the claim consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a).” (internal quotation marks omitted)
“The McDonnell Douglas/Burdine framework applies only when discrimination plaintiffs rely on circumstantial evidence to prove their claims.”
legal 6 standard for adjudicating a Rule 12(c) motion is the same as for a Rule 12(b)(6) motion
“The McDonnell Douglas / Burdine framework applies only when discrimination plaintiffs rely on circumstantial evidence to prove their claims.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Keith, Moore, Cole

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

62 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this 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.