Smith v. Da Ros

How courts have described this case

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

• dismissing federal claim and declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over remaining state law claim
• “[M]ere temporal proximity—even very close temporal proximity—is not always sufficient to support an inference that the plaintiff’s protected activity was a motivating factor in the defendant’s adverse employment action.” (emphasis added)
• “[A]s the Supreme Court has observed, the cases that accept mere temporal proximity . . . as sufficient evidence of causality to establish a prima facie case of unlawful retaliation uniformly hold that the temporal proximity must be very close.” (internal punctuation omitted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).