Skip to main content
· 5/1/1996

Robert S, FURR, Leslie Woosley, Bernard E. Ozinga, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY, INC., Defendant-Appellant

Citations

  • 82 F.3d 980
  • 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 10024
  • 68 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 44,066
  • 70 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1325
  • 1996 WL 218841

How courts have described this case

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

  • “Statistical evil dence which fails to properly take into account nondiseriminatory explanations does not permit an inference of pretext.”
  • “[I]t is the manager’s perception of the employee’s performance that is relevant, not plaintiff’s subjective evaluation of his own relative performance.”
  • “It is the manager’s perception of the employee’s performance that is relevant….”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Baldock, McWilliams, Kelly

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.