MARY ABRAYTIS v. PORTER COUNTY ASSESSOR

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an infer ence of discrimination is not supported if a jury comparing the individuals’ relative qualifications “would find the question close”
• stating that “in order to justify an inference of discrimination, the qualifications gap must be great enough to be inherently indicative of discrimination”
• stating that “courts must not second-guess an employer’s initial choice of appropriate qualifications[,][but] rather ... defer to the employer’s decision of what nondiscriminatory qualities it will seek in filling a position”
• upholding summary judgment because the plaintiff and the selectee were both qualified for the promotion and there was no evidence that the plaintiff was a “discernibly better” candidate than the selectee
• upholding summary judgment because the plaintiff and the selectee were both qualified for the promotion and there was no evidence that the plaintiff was a “discernibly better” candidate than the selectee
• rejecting the argument that preparation of an explanation for a hiring decision after litigation has commenced “casts doubt on the credibility of that explanation and therefore is evidence of pretext”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).