pretext rule (California) · Go Syfert
← California issues

pretext rule in California

6 California opinions name it 1 courts 1999–2025 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in California.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Harris v. City of Santa Monica green
cal · 2013
2 sentences

2025York could not find any cases but pointed the court to Harris v. City of Santa Monica (2013) 56 Cal.4th 203 , which the 18 court concluded did not support York’s position.

2024York could not find any cases but pointed the court to Harris v. City of Santa Monica (2013) 56 Cal.4th 203 , which the court concluded did not support York’s position.

22024–2025
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green green
scotus · 1973
2 sentences

2025Furthermore, pretext may also be shown by the weakness, implausibilities, inconsistencies, incoherences in the City’s reasons for its actions.” The City argued that a pretext instruction was unnecessary because pretext was part of the burden-shifting framework under McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (1973) 411 U.S. 792 , which was not relevant once a case proceeded to trial.

2024Furthermore, pretext may also be shown by the weakness, implausibilities, inconsistencies, incoherences in the City’s reasons for its actions.” The City argued that a pretext instruction was unnecessary because pretext was part of the burden-shifting framework under McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (1973) 411 U.S. 792 , which was not relevant once a case proceeded to trial.

22024–2025
Whren v. United States green
scotus · 1996
2 sentences

1999Moreover, the Woods court carefully noted that administrative inspections are not subject to the pretext rule of Whren v. United States, supra, 517 U.S. 806 , 116 S.Ct. 1769 , 135 L.Ed.2d 89 . ( People v. Woods, supra, at p. 678 , 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 88 , 981 P.2d 1019 .) DISPOSITION Judgment reversed.

1999Moreover, the Woods court carefully noted that administrative inspections are not subject to the pretext rule of Whren v. United States, supra, 517 U.S. 806 .

21999–1999
Duncan v. Department of Personnel Administration green
calctapp · 2000
2 sentences

2014(Id. at p. 334, 351.) In Duncan, supra, 77 Cal.App.4th 1166 , the plaintiff did not even argue his demotion (in lieu of layoff) fell within the pretext exception.

2014(Id. at p. 334, 351.) In Duncan, supra, 77 Cal.App.4th 1166 , the plaintiff did not even argue his demotion (in lieu of layoff) fell within the pretext exception.

12014–2014
McKelvey v. Pierce green
nj · 2002
2 sentences

2004In McKelvey v. Pierce (2002) 173 N.J. 26 [ 800 A.2d 840 ] the New Jersey Supreme Court allowed a priesthood candidate to sue a diocese for sexual harassment on the theory that the core of the dispute wasn’t truly religious.

2004In McKelvey v. Pierce (2002) 173 N.J. 26 [ 800 A.2d 840 ] the New Jersey Supreme Court allowed a priesthood candidate to sue a diocese for sexual harassment on the theory that the core of the dispute wasn’t truly religious.

12004–2004
People v. Woods green
cal · 1999
2 sentences

1999Moreover, the Woods court carefully noted that administrative inspections are not subject to the pretext rule of Whren v. United States, supra, 517 U.S. 806 , 116 S.Ct. 1769 , 135 L.Ed.2d 89 . ( People v. Woods, supra, at p. 678 , 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 88 , 981 P.2d 1019 .) DISPOSITION Judgment reversed.

1999Moreover, the Woods court carefully noted that administrative inspections are not subject to the pretext rule of Whren v. United States, supra, 517 U.S. 806 , 116 S.Ct. 1769 , 135 L.Ed.2d 89 . ( People v. Woods, supra, at p. 678 , 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 88 , 981 P.2d 1019 .) DISPOSITION Judgment reversed.

11999–1999

Where else courts name it

TX 22 (1990–2026) UT 16 (1992–2019) WA 15 (1992–2019) IA 9 (1994–2020) IL 7 (1991–2025) KS 6 (1994–2023) CA 6 (1999–2025) NM 5 (1990–2016) NY 4 (1993–2024) IN 4 (1995–2025) PA 4 (2010–2018) CT 4 (2000–2015) AK 4 (2001–2019) NJ 4 (2005–2024) FL 4 (1993–2023) AR 3 (2002–2010) MO 3 (1958–2013) NV 3 (1995–2016) MA 3 (1995–2026) MS 2 (1916–1930) TN 2 (2010–2017) CO 2 (1995–1996) DC 2 (2010–2012) HI 2 (2008–2010) MD 2 (2022–2025)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check