Many plaintiffs complain they are treated differently than other co-workers in some way. It might be about pay, promotion opportunities, etc. In one case, two plaintiffs said they were treated differently than other peers and that they were subjected to derogatory comments about Italians. In Cicalese v. University of Texas Medical Branch, No. 17-CV-0067,
There are some theories of law that some courts and most defense lawyers rely on to undermine otherwise good discrimination cases. One of those theories is the “stray remarks” doctrine. In general, the stray remarks doctrine holds that some remarks by management are so remote from the adverse personnel action that they are not relevant.
A Western District of Texas decision applies the discredited “pretext plus” analysis in resolving a motion for summary judgment. The decision also fails to construe fact inferences in favor of the non-movant.
Continue Reading San Antonio Federal Court Applies Pretext Plus
This is what is wrong with federal judges when it comes to employment law. In a recent deicison, the Fifth Circuit applied the discredited "stray remarks doctrine." Of course, a defense employment lawyer notes the application approvingly. See post. In Jackson v. Cal-Western Packaging Corporation, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (federal)