Tommie Y. MOORE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HUGHES HELICOPTERS, INC., a DIVISION OF SUMMA CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that an employer may rebut the employee's prima facie case by showing the inaccuracy of the employee's statistics
• finding definition of class insufficient when it involved violations of proposed members’ constitutional rights
• “some inquiry into the substance of a case may be necessary to ascertain satisfaction of the commonality and typicality requirements of Rule 23(a)”
• plaintiffs’ burden “entails more than the simple assertion of [commonality and typicality] but less than a prima facie showing of liability”
• proxy pool must be that of the local labor force possessing the requisite skills
• a plaintiff must establish that “a facially neutral 25 employment practice has a ‘significantly discriminatory’ impact upon a group protected by Title VII”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).