Paul Carter v. William L. Ball, III

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that when plaintiff does not prove that non-discriminatory reasons are pretext, she has not met her “ultimate burden of proving retaliatory discharge”
• holding that to satisfy the fourth prong, the plaintiff, who was African American, “need only show that the position was filled by a white applicant”
• recognizing that, where a plaintiff shows that he was discharged soon after engaging in protected activity, the evidence is sufficiently suggestive of retaliatory motive
• recognizing that a “slight decrease in pay coupled with some loss of supervisory responsibilities” is insufficient evidence of constructive discharge
• holding that to satisfy the fourth prong, the plaintiff, who was African American, “need only show that the position was filled by a white applicant”
• holding that a supervisor’s display of a gorilla poster and that supervisor’s references to it were not severe or pervasive

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).