Spengler v. Worthington Cylinders

How courts have described this case

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

• holding a span of roughly three weeks between the plaintiffs complaint and termination created an inference of causation when coupled with a change in his supervisor’s behavior
• holding that even though the plaintiff had not checked the retaliation box on his EEOC charge, he had exhausted his retaliation claim because he had alleged sufficient facts in his EEOC charge to put the EEOC on notice of his claim
• noting that “temporal proximity, standing alone, is not enough to establish a causal connection for a retaliation claim”
• finding that temporal proximity alone is insufficient to establish a causal connection for a retaliation claim
• stating that “temporal proximity, standing alone, is not enough to establish a causal connection for a retaliation claim”
• finding that temporal proximity alone is insufficient to establish a causal connection for a retaliation claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).