Skip to main content
· 10/25/1996

Raymond Koger v. Janet Reno, United States Attorney General

Citations

  • 98 F.3d 631
  • 321 U.S. App. D.C. 182
  • 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 27630
  • 69 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 44,439
  • 73 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1855

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that hypothetical-promotion rubric made up of many tests, only one of which had disparate impact, would still “demonstrate[] a causal link” between discriminatory test and disparate end result
  • “Following Bazemore, courts have taken the view that a defendant cannot undermine a regression analysis simply by pointing to variables not taken into account that might conceivably have pulled the analysis’s sting.”
  • applying and explaining disparate treatment and disparate impact standards

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Wald, Williams, Ginsburg

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.