Wilbur L. LOVELACE, Appellant, v. SHERWIN-WILLIAMS COMPANY, Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that such evi- dence does not demonstrate pretext because \[s]uch a leap of infer- ence could only be by rank speculation and not by any rational processes of inference\
• adapting the framework used in Title VII cases to ADEA cases
• Title VII was not created to allow the Court to \second guess\ the wisdom of an employer's judgment
• “[I]t is the duty of the court to withdraw the case from the [factfinder] when the necessary inference is so tenuous that it rests merely upon speculation and conjecture.”
• plaintiff must have “suffered an unfavorable employment action”
• adopting McDonnell Douglas pre- sumption framework in ADEA cases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).