McDonnell Douglas presumption in Rhode Island

2017In my opinion, defendants did not have to prove that they followed the “general hiring practices” with respect to the 2004 promotion decision in order to meet their burden of production; it was for plaintiff to provide contrary proof in the course of the third phase under McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802-04 (1973).2 Moreover, in my judgment, the jury instruction in this case contained a fundamental flaw (a flaw that is so grave that it certainly can be said that a jury “could have been misled by [the] erroneous charge to the resultant prejudice” of defendants; see State v. V

2010McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green , 411 U.S. 792 (1973); see Newport Shipyard v. Rhode Island Comm'n for Human Rights. 484 A.2d 893 (R.I. 1984) (adopting McDonnell-Douglas framework in Rhode Island).

2017It is this practical coercion which causes the McDonnell Douglas presumption to function as a means of - 19 - ‘arranging the presentation of evidence.’” Hicks, 509 U.S. at 510 n.3 (quoting Burdine, 450 U.S. at 252-53 , and Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 986 (1988)).

2017It is this practical coercion which causes the McDonnell Douglas presumption to function as a means of - 19 - ‘arranging the presentation of evidence.’” Hicks, 509 U.S. at 510 n.3 (quoting Burdine, 450 U.S. at 252-53 , and Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 986 (1988)).

2014This prong “focuses on the ultimate question of ‘discrimination vel non.’” Neri, 897 A.2d at 50 (quoting Casey v. Town of Portsmouth, 861 A.2d 1032, 1037 (R.I. 2004)).

2014This prong “focuses on the ultimate question of ‘discrimination vel non.’” Neri, 897 A.2d at 50 (quoting Casey v. Town of Portsmouth, 861 A.2d 1032, 1037 (R.I. 2004)).

2010McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green , 411 U.S. 792 (1973); see Newport Shipyard v. Rhode Island Comm'n for Human Rights. 484 A.2d 893 (R.I. 1984) (adopting McDonnell-Douglas framework in Rhode Island).

2004The initial onus in the McDonnell Douglas analysis rests with plaintiff; he must establish the four elements of a *1037 prima face case, Newport Shipyard, Inc., 484 A.2d at 898 , which vary depending upon whether the alleged discrimination was a termination, failure to promote, or failure to hire, Sanchez v. Puerto Rico Oil Co., 37 F.3d 712, 719 (1st Cir.1994).

2009Casey , 861 A.2d at 1039 (citing Waterhouse v. District of Columbia , 298 F.3d 989 , 992-93 (D.C.

2009Casey , 861 A.2d at 1039 (citing Waterhouse v. District of Columbia , 298 F.3d 989 , 992-93 (D.C.

2017It is this practical coercion which causes the McDonnell Douglas presumption to function as a means of - 19 - ‘arranging the presentation of evidence.’” Hicks, 509 U.S. at 510 n.3 (quoting Burdine, 450 U.S. at 252-53 , and Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 986 (1988)).

2017It is this practical coercion which causes the McDonnell Douglas presumption to function as a means of - 19 - ‘arranging the presentation of evidence.’” Hicks, 509 U.S. at 510 n.3 (quoting Burdine, 450 U.S. at 252-53 , and Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 986 (1988)).

2017It is this practical coercion which causes the McDonnell Douglas presumption to function as a means of - 19 - ‘arranging the presentation of evidence.’” Hicks, 509 U.S. at 510 n.3 (quoting Burdine, 450 U.S. at 252-53 , and Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 986 (1988)).

2017It is this practical coercion which causes the McDonnell Douglas presumption to function as a means of - 19 - ‘arranging the presentation of evidence.’” Hicks, 509 U.S. at 510 n.3 (quoting Burdine, 450 U.S. at 252-53 , and Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 986 (1988)).

2017In my opinion, defendants did not have to prove that they followed the “general hiring practices” with respect to the 2004 promotion decision in order to meet their burden of production; it was for plaintiff to provide contrary proof in the course of the third phase under McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802-04 (1973).2 Moreover, in my judgment, the jury instruction in this case contained a fundamental flaw (a flaw that is so grave that it certainly can be said that a jury “could have been misled by [the] erroneous charge to the resultant prejudice” of defendants; see State v. V

2017In my opinion, defendants did not have to prove that they followed the “general hiring practices” with respect to the 2004 promotion decision in order to meet their burden of production; it was for plaintiff to provide contrary proof in the course of the third phase under McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802-04 (1973).2 Moreover, in my judgment, the jury instruction in this case contained a fundamental flaw (a flaw that is so grave that it certainly can be said that a jury “could have been misled by [the] erroneous charge to the resultant prejudice” of defendants; see State v. V

2014Id. at 15,17, 20 .

2014Id. at 15,17, 20 .

2012Mary’s Honor Center v. Hides, 509 U.S. 502, 507 , 113 S.Ct. 2742 , 125 L.Ed.2d 407 (1993) (alteration and emphasis in original) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., 530 U.S. 133, 143 , 120 S.Ct. 2097 , 147 L.Ed.2d 105 (2000); Udo v. Tomes, 54 F.3d 9, 12 (1st Cir. 1995). .

2012Mary’s Honor Center v. Hides, 509 U.S. 502, 507 , 113 S.Ct. 2742 , 125 L.Ed.2d 407 (1993) (alteration and emphasis in original) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., 530 U.S. 133, 143 , 120 S.Ct. 2097 , 147 L.Ed.2d 105 (2000); Udo v. Tomes, 54 F.3d 9, 12 (1st Cir. 1995). .

2012Mary’s Honor Center v. Hides, 509 U.S. 502, 507 , 113 S.Ct. 2742 , 125 L.Ed.2d 407 (1993) (alteration and emphasis in original) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., 530 U.S. 133, 143 , 120 S.Ct. 2097 , 147 L.Ed.2d 105 (2000); Udo v. Tomes, 54 F.3d 9, 12 (1st Cir. 1995). .

2012Mary’s Honor Center v. Hides, 509 U.S. 502, 507 , 113 S.Ct. 2742 , 125 L.Ed.2d 407 (1993) (alteration and emphasis in original) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., 530 U.S. 133, 143 , 120 S.Ct. 2097 , 147 L.Ed.2d 105 (2000); Udo v. Tomes, 54 F.3d 9, 12 (1st Cir. 1995). .

2004The initial onus in the McDonnell Douglas analysis rests with plaintiff; he must establish the four elements of a *1037 prima face case, Newport Shipyard, Inc., 484 A.2d at 898 , which vary depending upon whether the alleged discrimination was a termination, failure to promote, or failure to hire, Sanchez v. Puerto Rico Oil Co., 37 F.3d 712, 719 (1st Cir.1994).

2004The initial onus in the McDonnell Douglas analysis rests with plaintiff; he must establish the four elements of a *1037 prima face case, Newport Shipyard, Inc., 484 A.2d at 898 , which vary depending upon whether the alleged discrimination was a termination, failure to promote, or failure to hire, Sanchez v. Puerto Rico Oil Co., 37 F.3d 712, 719 (1st Cir.1994).

2004In a failure to hire case such as this one, the applicant must prove: (1) he is a member of the protected class, in this case at least forty years old; (2) he applied for an open position; (3) he was not selected; and (4) the employer “filled the position by hiring another individual with similar qualifications.” Gu v. Boston Police Department, 312 F.3d 6, 11 (1st Cir.2002).

2004In a failure to hire case such as this one, the applicant must prove: (1) he is a member of the protected class, in this case at least forty years old; (2) he applied for an open position; (3) he was not selected; and (4) the employer “filled the position by hiring another individual with similar qualifications.” Gu v. Boston Police Department, 312 F.3d 6, 11 (1st Cir.2002).