Michael Johnson v. At & T Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the proper inquiry is not whether an employer is correct in determining an employee violated policy but whether an employer honestly believes an employee violated policy
• explaining that the consideration in evaluating pretext is whether the employer honestly believed the employee violated the company’s code of conduct, not whether the employer was factually correct in its conclusion
• acknowledging that the employee “does not dispute the fact that an employee’s violation of company policy is a legitimate reason for subsequent termination.”
• explaining that mistakes employers make in employment actions do “not automatically prove that [the employer] was … motivated by unlawful discrimination”
• determining that the employer’s failure to interview two of the employee’s witnesses during the investigation did not show that the termination was pretext for racial discrimination
• explaining that the consideration in evaluating pretext is whether the employer honestly believed the employee violated the company's code of conduct, not whether the employer was factually correct in its conclusion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).