Rogers & Baldwin Hardware Co. v. Commissioner

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the federal standard for evaluating Title VII claims applies to WLAD claims
• defining \substantial factor\ to mean the protected trait was \a significant motivating factor bringing about the employer's decision\
• relying on ambiguous reasons by an employer when finding pretext in a WLAD case
• employer’s reason “was not a motivating factor in employment decisions for other employees in the same circumstances”
• “The Court of Appeals disregarded [the] statements . . . as stray remarks that do not give rise to an inference of discriminatory intent . . . We disagree.”
• applying the McDonnell Douglas framework in the employment discrimination context

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).