Lytle v. Malady’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate ·

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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “After the employer has met its burden of production, the employee must proceed without the benefit of the earlier presumption [created by the McDonnell Douglas prima facie case].... Once the presumption drops out of the case, the plaintiff retains the ultimate burden of proving discrimination. Plaintiff has the opportunity to come forward with evidence, including the previously produced evidence establishing the prima facie case, sufficient to permit a reasonable fact finder to conclude that the discrimination was defendant’s true motive in making the adverse employment decision. To prevail, the employee must submit admissible evidence to prove that the employer’s nondiscriminatory reason was not the true reason for the discharge and that the plaintiffs age was a motivating factor in the employer’s decision. Thus, the employee must prove that the employer’s explanation was a pretext for discrimination. The proofs offered in support of the prima facie case may be sufficient to create a triable issue of fact that the employer’s stated reason is a pretext, as long as the evidence would enable a reasonable fact finder to infer that the employer’s decision had a discriminatory basis. The strength of the prima facie case and the significance of the disbelieving pretext will vary from case to case depending on the circumstances .... * * * Hi * * [On an employer-brought motion for summary judgment,] we would hold that when viewed in a light most favorable, to the plaintiff, the evide”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 344 F. Supp. 2d 584 - Scuderi v. Monumental Life Insurance

2. “Your task is to determine whether PPG discriminated against Mr. Brocklehurst. You are not to substitute, however, your judgment for PPG’s business judgment or decide this case based upon what you would have done. However, you may consider the reasonableness or lack of reasonableness of PPG’s stated business judgment along with all other evidence in determining whether PPG discriminated or did not discriminate against Mr. Brock-lehurst. Please remember that your job is to determine if Plaintiff has proven, by a preponderance of the evidence, that his age was a determining factor in the decision to terminate him. You should not find that the decision was unlawful just because you may disagree with Defendant’s stated reasons or because you believe the decision was unfair, so long as Defendant reached its decision without regard to Plaintiffs age. You may consider the fairness of the decision in determining whether you believe PPG’s reasons for the termination; however, unfairness of the decision alone is not enough to find for Mr. Brocklehurst. You must find that his age was a determining factor in the decision to discharge him.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Brocklehurst v. PPG Industries, Inc.

3. “[W]e expressly adopt the intermediate approach endorsed by the United States Supreme Court in Hicks . For a plaintiff to survive summary disposition, he must always present an issue of fact regarding whether the defendant impermissi-bly discriminated. In some contexts, this may be shown merely by disproving the employer’s articulated reason, if, and only if, disproving the employer’s reason also shows discrimination. In other contexts, merely disproving an employer’s articulated reason will not prove discrimination.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 599 F. Supp. 2d 1118 - Volk v. X-Rite, Inc.