Tenth Circuit· 12/28/2005

Sorbo v. United Parcel Service

Citations

432 F.3d 1169
2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 28792
87 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 42,224
97 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 100
2005 WL 3541067

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that Rule 60(b) motion filed a year after judgment was not made within a reasonable time
holding that “computer assisted legal research” is “not within the scope of § 1920”
recognizing that “proof that the employer treated similarly situated employees more favorably” is “just one sufficient means to do this and should not itself be mistaken as an indispensable element of the prima facie case”
noting that the discriminatory intent factor “may be (and often is) satisfied by” proof of disparate treatment
stating that “several cases involving adverse action prompted by unsatisfactory performance or misconduct have framed the [third] element ... broadly, as requiring a showing of circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination”
stating that the broader requirement of showing circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination “may be (and often is) satisfied by proof that the employer treated similarly situated employees more favorably”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lucero, Anderson, Brorby

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

50 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

41 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.