Runyon v. Applied Extrusion Technologies, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that it is the plaintiff’s burden to show that defendant was moti- vated by age discrimination, rather than defendant’s “burden to show that it was not.” (citing Gross v. FBL Fin. Servs., Inc., 557 U.S. 167, 177–78 (2009)
• affirming district court’s decision, after plaintiff’s case-in-chief, entering judgment as a matter of law in favor of defendant on plaintiff’s age discrimination claim
• affirming district court’s decision, after plaintiff’s case-in-chief, entering judgment as a matter of law in favor of defendant on plaintiff’s age discrimination claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).