U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Target Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that EEOC “presented expert testimony indicating that some people can determine a speaker’s race based on his or her voice or name”
• finding that jury could infer that employer knew applicants’ race based on their names and extracurricular activities listed on their resumes
• Explaining that summary judgment is only proper “where no rational fact finder could believe that the employer lied about its proffered reasons for the hiring decision in question.”
• Explaining that summary judgment is only proper “where no rational fact finder could believe that the employer lied about its proffered reasons for the hiring decision in question.”
• rejecting the mere assertion that the employee \did not meet the requirements\ because the employer failed to \give a clear statement as to which requirements [he] lacked\
• rejecting the mere assertion that the employee “did not meet the requirements” because the employer failed to “give a clear statement as to which requirements [he] lacked”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).