Reynolds v. Barrett Gould v. Chamberlin

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “statistics demonstrating employer-wide discrimination are insufficient to establish which individual defendants engaged in purposeful discrimination”
• holding that a plaintiff cannot proceed with a disparate impact theory of liability under section 1981
• noting that in 8 pattern-or-practice case “the burden of production shifts to the 9 employer”
• recognizing distinction between McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework and hostile work environment analysis
• stating that the decision in Iqbal caused conflict with the Second Circuit about the continued vitality of the supervisory liability test, but declining to rule on the issue because it did not apply to the facts of the case
• stating statistics have and will continue to serve an important role in pattern-or-practice cases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).