McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
- Decided
- May 14, 1973
- Docket
- 72-490
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 38,518 timesSuperseded by statute (not yet verified)Possible negative treatment: superseded by statute, receded (not yet verified) · Kastrati v. M.E.G. Restaurant Enterprises Ltd.
What later courts said
- holding that plaintiff's prima facie case and evidence of pretext were not sufficient to survive defendant's motion for summary judgment — Lizardo v. Denny's, Inc. (2001)
- holding that claimant triggers the presumption by carrying “the initial burden under the statute of establishing a prima facie case of racial discrimination” — Central Virginia Obstetrics & Gynecology Associates, P.C. v. Whitfield (2004)
- ruling that retention or rehiring of white employees engaged in similar acts of misconduct would be especially relevant to showing of pretext — Gordon D. Simms, Gordon D. Simms v. First Gibraltar Bank, First Gibraltar Bank, Fsb, Now Known as First Madison Bank, Fsb (1996)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Mr. Justice Powell delivered the opinion of the Court.
The case before us raises significant questions as to the proper order and nature of proof in actions under Title [*794] VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 78 Stat. 253, 42 U. S. C. § 2000e et seq.
Petitioner, McDonnell Douglas Corp., is an aerospace and aircraft manufacturer headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri, where it employs over 30,000 people. Respondent, a black citizen of St. Louis, worked for petitioner as a mechanic and laboratory technician from 1956 until August 28, 1964 [1] when he was laid off in the course of a general reduction in petitioner’s work force.
Statutes cited
Cite this
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.