§

Complainant, v. Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General, Department of Justice (U.S. Marshals Service), Agency.

0720140036 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 22, 2015)
Complainant, v. Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General, Department of Justice (U.S. Marshals Service), Agency.

7 Cited authorities

  1. Univ. of Tex. Sw. Med. Ctr. v. Nassar

    570 U.S. 338 (2013)   Cited 5,423 times   78 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff must establish but-for causation in a Title VII retaliation claim

  2. Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc.

    557 U.S. 167 (2009)   Cited 4,602 times   83 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff must establish but-for causation in an ADEA disparate treatment claim

  3. Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    340 U.S. 474 (1951)   Cited 9,674 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "

  4. McKennon v. Nashville Banner Publ'g Co.

    513 U.S. 352 (1995)   Cited 1,192 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, under the ADEA, neither reinstatement nor front pay is appropriate when, subsequent to the statutory violation, the plaintiff's employment has been terminated for legitimate reasons

  5. Pullman-Standard v. Swint

    456 U.S. 273 (1982)   Cited 1,625 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[w]hen an appellate court discerns that a district court has failed to make a finding because of an erroneous view of the law, the usual rule is that there should be a remand for further proceedings to permit the trial court to make the missing findings"

  6. Gomez-Perez v. Potter

    553 U.S. 474 (2008)   Cited 308 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the statutory phrase 'discrimination based on age' " in § 633a "includes retaliation based on the filing of an age discrimination complaint"

  7. Section 2000e-16 - Employment by Federal Government

    42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16   Cited 5,026 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Adopting provisions of § 2000e-5(f)-(k), including that "[e]ach United States district court . . . shall have jurisdiction of actions brought under this subchapter"