Patricia Cosgrove v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

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 plaintiff had established a prima facie case where the defendant-employer was aware of plaintiff’s EEOC complaint
• noting that fraudulent joinder may be established by an 10 “inability of the plaintiff to establish a cause of action against the non-diverse party in state 11 court.”
• a violation occurs whenever there is “retaliatory animus, even if valid objective reasons for the discharge exist”
• defendant’s failure to follow its own procedures for addressing employee performance deficiencies was adverse action constituting retaliation
• “Thus, once the ‘defendant has succeeded in carrying its burden of production, the McDonnell Douglas framework — with its presumptions and burdens — is no longer relevant.’ ”
• analyzing Title VII retaliation claim under Price Waterhouse

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).