Lois Christian Amber Edens v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant’s stated basis for its actions, to prevent shoplifting, sufficiently articulated a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason at the second phase of the burden-shifting framework
• noting that the test allows a plaintiff to state a claim when similarly situated individuals are not available
• explaining that the supervisor did not conduct his own investigation, but terminated the plaintiff based exclusively on the coworker’s allegations
• holding that the trial court erred in granting judgment as a matter of law because appellants had advanced sufficient evidence of race discrimination so that the issue of whether the shoppers were removed from the store due to race discrimination was a question for the jury
• noting that §1981 prohibits race discrimination in the making and enforcing of contracts
• acknowledging a protected interest when customer who had necessary intention and means of payment selected an item for purchase

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).