Roebuck, Dr. James R. v. Drexel University

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 decisionmaker's statements exhibiting racial bias could add support to the plaintiff's claim of Presently before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 17), Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition (ECF No. 19
• reversing district court's grant of judgment n.o.v., but affirming grant of new trial because of \overwhelming\ evidence
• reversing district court’s grant of judgment n.o.v., but affirming grant of new trial because of “overwhelming” evidence
• declining appellee’s “invitation to transform what is in essence stray language and at best no more than dicta into a binding holding”
• upholding admissibility of discriminatory comment by decisionmaker made five years before denial of tenure
• upholding admissibility of discriminatory comment by decisionmaker made five years before denial of tenure

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).