Rios Mendez v. Alvarado

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that a court considering preferred evidence of pretext is not a “roving commission to review business judgments”
• considering § 1983 claim sounding in equal protection based on race, gender, and religion
• “While[] the direct testimony of other employees about their treatment by the defendants may be relevant to the issue of the employer’s intent, the complaints, themselves, are . . . inadmissible hearsay.” (alteration in original) (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).