Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 160 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Lee v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lee v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co. Anchor | green | “the employment actions being compared will be deemed to have been taken under nearly identical circumstances when the employees being compared held the same job or responsibilities, shared the same supervisor or had their employment status determined by the same person, and have…” | 81 |
| 2 | Lee v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co. | green | “if the difference between the plaintiff's conduct and that of those alleged to be similarly situated accounts for the difference in treatment received from the employer, the employees are not similarly situated for the purposes of an employment discrimination analysis.” | 40 |
| 3 | McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Co. | green | “precise equivalence in culpability between employees is not the ultimate question.” | 13 |
| 4 | Lawrence v. University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston | green | “employment discrimination claims brought under 42 u.s.c. 1981 . . . are analyzed under the evidentiary framework applicable to claims arising under title vii . . . .” | 10 |
| 5 | Robert MAYBERRY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VOUGHT AIRCRAFT COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee | green | “the defendant bears the burden of producing evidence that its employment decision was based on a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason.” | 8 |
| 6 | Clara Patrick v. Tom Ridge, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security | green | “as the ultimate issue is the employer's reasoning at the moment the questioned employment decision is made, a justification that could not have motivated the employer's decision is not evidence that tends to illuminate this ultimate issue and is therefore simply irrelevant at th…” | 8 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.