NUSKEY v. Hochberg

How courts have described this case

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

• excluding “me too” testimony regarding discrimination by a different decisionmaker that “occurred approximately ten years before the events at issue in the instant case”
• “[s]ubsequent actions . . . may be less probative of . . . intent than prior actions . . . . [but] they may still be relevant to intent.”
• “[E]vidence of an employer’s past discriminatory . . . behavior toward other employees . . . may, depending on the circumstances, be relevant to whether [the] employer discriminated . . . against . . . plaintiff.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).