Issue: WHETHER A PLAINTIFF HAS MET HIS BURDEN BY ESTABLISHING A PRIMA FACIE CASE THAT HE WAS A VICTIM OF DISCRIMINATION.
| Area of Law: | Employee Law |
| Keywords: | Prima facie case of discrimination; Burden of proof |
| Jurisdiction: | Federal |
| Cited Cases: | 517 U.S. 308; 753 P.2d 517; 80 Wn. App. 212; 817 F.2d 1338; 507 U.S. 604; 907 P.2d 1223; 110 Wn. 2d 355 |
| Cited Statutes: | None |
| Date: | 03/01/2001 |
See TA s "Grimwood v. University of Puget Sound, Inc., 110 Wn." c 1 l "Grimwood v. University of Puget Sound, Inc., 110 Wn. 2d 355, 753 P.2d 517 (1988)"Grimwood v. University of Puget Sound, Inc., 110 Wn. 2d 355, 362‑64, 753 P.2d 517 (1988); TA s "Cassino v. Reichold Chems., Inc., 817 F.2d 1338, 134" c 1 l "Cassino v. Reichold Chems., Inc., 817 F.2d 1338 (9th Cir. 1987)"Cassino v. Reichold Chems., Inc., 817 F.2d 1338, 1343 (9th Cir. 1987) (prima facie case of discrimination established by proof that the plaintiff was between the ages of 40 and 70, that he or she was qualified for the position, and that a younger person with equal or inferior qualifications was hired instead).
It has been clear since TA s "O’Connor v. Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp., 517 U." c 1 l "O’Connor v. Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp., 517 U.S. 308 (1996)"O’Connor v. Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp., 517 U.S. 308 (1996), that the plaintiff in an age discrimination case need not show that he or she was replaced by someone outside the protected class in order to establish a prima facie case.TA s "O’Connor v. Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp., 517 U." c 1 Id. at 312. This is because the age discrimination statutes do not “ban discrimination against employees because they are aged 40 or older; it bans discrimination against employees because of their age, […]