Patrick v. Ridge’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 116 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “As the ultimate issue is the employer’s reasoning at the moment the questioned employment decision is made, a justification that could not have motivated the employer’s decision is not evidence that tends to illuminate this ultimate issue and is therefore simply irrelevant at this stage of the inquiry. Especially in the context of this case — the employer’s summary judgment motion to dismiss— such an offering is tantamount to offering no reason at all.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Turner v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co. · Burton v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.

2. “[T]he explanation given by the [employer], i.e., that [employee] was not “sufficiently suited” for the position — even including [supervisor’s] belief that she would not “fit in” — does not necessarily qualify as a “nondiscriminatory” reason. After all, a hiring official’s subjective belief that an individual would not “fit in” or was “not sufficiently suited” for a job is at least as consistent with discriminatory intent as it is with nondiscriminatory intent: The employer just might have found the candidate “not sufficiently suited” because of a protected trait such as age, race, or engaging in a protected activity. We hold as a matter of law that justifying an adverse employment decision by offering a content-less and nonspecific statement, such as that a candidate is not “sufficiently suited” for the position, is not specific enough to meet a defendant employer’s burden of production under McDonnell Douglas. It is, at bottom, a non-reason.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Abrams v. Department of Public Safety · Simpson v. Beaver Dam Community Hospitals, Inc.

3. “the employee must show that the employer’s putative legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason was not its real reason, but was merely a pretext for discrimination. In other words, after a defendant employer has met its burden of production, an employee plaintiff ... must ... demonstrate that there is a material issue of disputed fact as to discrimina tion.... In some instances, proof of pretext alone will suffice.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Monteverde v. New Orleans Fire Department · McFall v. Gonzales