Myrtle Thomas v. Eastman Kodak Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a plaintiff can meet the burden of proving discriminatory animus without “smoking gun” evidence when disparity of treatment is “striking enough” to infer the plaintiff’s membership in a protected class was the cause of adverse action
• finding that jury could conclude that unlawful bias motivated supervisor’s disparate treatment of plaintiff as compared to her treatment of co-workers
• noting that the McDonnell Douglas framework was designed to allow plaintiffs to prove discrimination by circumstantial evidence
• holding the administrative limitations period was tolled because the employee “did not initially have any crystallized implications or apparent tangible effects” of discrimination
• holding the administrative limitations period was tolled because the employee “did not initially have any crystallized implications or apparent tangible effects” of discrimination
• finding that barring a Title VII claim which allegedly arose from acts of which plaintiff had knowledge does not further the purpose of the serial violation exception

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).