Skip to main content
· 2/5/1997

Matti I. SCHULTZ, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. McDONNELL DOUGLAS CORPORATION, Defendant/Appellee

Citations

  • 105 F.3d 1258
  • 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 1843
  • 69 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 44,513
  • 75 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 385
  • 1997 WL 43272

How courts have described this case

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

  • probative value of statistical evidence that does not reflect significant differences among employees would be prejudicial and misleading
  • “We review the denial of a motion for a new trial under an abuse of discretion standard,” citing McKnight v. Johnson Controls, Inc., 36 F.3d 1396, 1400 (8th Cir. 1994)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Wollm, Murphy, Tunheim

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.