Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- proposal. (1)
- ADEA (1)
- Adverse (1)
- After-acquired evidence (1)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby (1)
-
- Chilling effect (1)
- Civil Rights Act (1)
- Civil rights (1)
- Costly (1)
- Discovery (1)
- Efficacy (1)
- Employer (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Heightened burden (1)
- Incentive (1)
- Intrusion (1)
- Judicial (1)
- Limit (1)
- McDonnell Douglas (1)
- Mixed motives (1)
- Sliding-scale (1)
- Summary judgment (1)
- Title VII (1)
- Undermine (1)
- Workplace (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Credulous Courts And The Tortured Trilogy: The Improper Use Of Summary Judgment In Title Vii And Adea Cases, Ann C. Mcginley
Credulous Courts And The Tortured Trilogy: The Improper Use Of Summary Judgment In Title Vii And Adea Cases, Ann C. Mcginley
Scholarly Works
Civil rights are under siege. In mid-1989, the United States Supreme Court decided several cases that severely limit the civil rights claims and remedies available to a plaintiff claiming employment discrimination. This Article examines the gradual and continuing erosion of the factfinder's role in federal employment discrimination cases and its replacement by an increasing use of summary judgment through which the courts make pretrial determinations formerly reserved for the factfinder at trial. This trend not only represents a major shift in court procedure and, in the case of age discrimination claims, a transfer of power from juries to judges, but …
Reinventing Reality: The Impermissible Intrusion Of After-Acquired Evidence In Title Vii Litigation, Ann C. Mcginley
Reinventing Reality: The Impermissible Intrusion Of After-Acquired Evidence In Title Vii Litigation, Ann C. Mcginley
Scholarly Works
This Article analyzes the use of after-acquired evidence to defeat a discrimination victim's claim against her employer. The use of the Mount Healthy and Price Waterhouse mixed motives analysis in after-acquired evidence cases is misplaced because it is impossible for the permissible motive—resume fraud—to have been a factor in the adverse employment decision. Furthermore, after the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, it would be an improper judicial intrusion upon the power of the legislature for courts to apply mixed motives analysis to these cases. Besides the constitutional limitation on the judiciary's power created by the Civil Rights …