Legal Opinion

William E. ELMORE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CAPSTAN, INC., Defendant-Appellee

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided June 19, 1995No. 93-3352PublishedCited by 81 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KANE, Senior District Judge.

Plaintiff employee, an African-American, initiated this Title VII action against his employer claiming his discharge for violating a work rule was the result of intentional discrimination based on race. The employee alleged disparate treatment, contending defendant disciplined non-minority employees more leniently for similar conduct. After a two-day bench trial, the district court found that while the employee had established a prima facie ease of disparate treatment, he had not established this treatment was the result of intentional discrimination based on race.…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Anderson v. City of Bessemer CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  5. Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by81 opinions

  1. Kendrick v. Penske Transportation Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
  2. Aramburu v. The Boeing CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1997
  3. MacKenzie v. City & County of DenverCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2005
  4. Smothers v. Solvay Chemicals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2014
  5. Rivera v. City & County of DenverCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004

76 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API