Woodruff, Phillip v. Peters, Mary

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that when employer has made “a legitimate proffer,” “positive evidence beyond mere [temporal] proximity is required to defeat the presumption that the proffered explanations are genuine”
• holding that where “less than a month separated” the plaintiff’s action and the defendant’s retaliatory action “a reasonable finder of fact could infer causation in that area without more”
• concluding that a period of “less than a month” sufficient to raise the inference
• holding that summary judgment was precluded where an employer’s communication indicated that the employee “could no longer count on the accommodations the [employer] had de facto afforded” even where “it is far from clear such accommodations are reasonable”
• concluding that the plaintiff stated a pri-ma facie case of retaliation, and “a reasonable finder of fact could infer causation ... without more,” where “less than a month separated” the plaintiffs protected activity and the allegedly retaliatory action
• finding that “less than a month” between protected event and adverse action was sufficiently close in time to infer discrimination

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).