Robert Liebman v. Metroplolitan Life Insurance Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a seven-year difference “qualifies as substantially younger” and gathering cases holding that differences as small as three years met the “substantially younger” threshold
• holding that a district court must rule on a motion to strike and determine declaration’s admissibility before ruling on a motion for summary judgment because the declaration could create a genuine dispute of material fact
• holding that a seven-year difference in age qualifies as substantially younger
• inferring that plaintiff was qualified where he had spent twenty-seven years with the company and held his final position for three years
• finding that a replacement who was seven years younger than the plaintiff “qualifies as substantially younger”
• holding seven years is substantially younger and noting as few as three years may suffice

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).