§

Margaret F. McIntosh, Appellant, v. William M. Daley, Secretary, Department of Commerce, Agency.

01965547 (E.E.O.C. Oct. 16, 1998)
Margaret F. McIntosh, Appellant, v. William M. Daley, Secretary, Department of Commerce, Agency.

15 Cited authorities

  1. Teamsters v. United States

    431 U.S. 324 (1977)   Cited 4,642 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff who did not apply for a position can still make prima facie showing if he can demonstrate his application for the position would have been futile

  2. Corning Glass Works v. Brennan

    417 U.S. 188 (1974)   Cited 1,424 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer has the burden of proof to show that it falls within the stated exemption

  3. Hazelwood School District v. United States

    433 U.S. 299 (1977)   Cited 873 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that to “constitute prima facie proof of a pattern or practice of discrimination,” a plaintiff must show “gross statistical disparities”

  4. Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.

    567 F.2d 429 (D.C. Cir. 1976)   Cited 355 times
    Holding that under Title VII class action, single-filing cannot revive claims that are no longer viable at the time of filing

  5. Grimm v. Rizk

    464 U.S. 1045 (1984)   Cited 55 times

    No. 83-815. January 9, 1984. Ct. App. Tex., 14th Sup. Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 640 S. W. 2d 711.

  6. Thompson v. Sawyer

    678 F.2d 257 (D.C. Cir. 1982)   Cited 140 times
    Upholding findings of fact but remanding for revision of remedies

  7. Patkus v. Sangamon-Cass Consortium

    769 F.2d 1251 (7th Cir. 1985)   Cited 113 times
    Holding that the portion of the plaintiff's claim that rested on the "differential between her salary and that of her successors . . . does make out a prima facie case of a violation of the Equal Pay Act [t]he salary paid to a successor who performs substantially the same work may provide a basis for an equal pay action"

  8. Brewster v. Barnes

    788 F.2d 985 (4th Cir. 1986)   Cited 76 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where plaintiff filed EPA suit on April 16, 1980, she was entitled to recover back pay only from April 16, 1978, because of the two-year statute of limitations, even though her salary disparity started July 1, 1977

  9. Maxwell v. City of Tucson

    803 F.2d 444 (9th Cir. 1986)   Cited 74 times
    Observing the EPA "creates a type of strict liability" and "no intent to discriminate need be shown"

  10. Horner v. Mary Institute

    613 F.2d 706 (8th Cir. 1980)   Cited 79 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the differential in salary between plaintiff and her comparator was the result of negotiations, which is sufficient to rebut plaintiff's prima facie case of pay discrimination

  11. Section 206 - Minimum wage

    29 U.S.C. § 206   Cited 9,040 times   101 Legal Analyses
    Asking only whether the alleged inequality resulted from “any other factor other than sex”