Pettibone v. Woodall

How courts have described this case

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

• upholding bus company’s refusal to hire new drivers past age 35 because of the potential danger of accidents from driver error due to age
• requiring bus company to demonstrate a “rational basis in fact” that elimination of maximum hiring rule for drivers would increase the risk of harm to passengers
• requiring bus company to demonstrate a “rational basis in fact” that elimination of maximum hiring rule for drivers would increase the risk of harm to passengers
• requirement that applicants for bus-driving position be younger than 35 years of age upheld on safety grounds
• “ ‘Pennsylvania law does not allow a state agency to create tenure unless the legislature specifically grants the agency the power to do so.’ ”
• where the Seventh Circuit held that an employer who is engaged in inherently dangerous activities, or whose business is primarily safety-related, need only show “a minimal increase in risk of harm” to estab lish the BFOQ defense

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).