Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Barbara R. Sheridan v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours and Company, Jacques Amblard

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided November 14, 1996No. 94-7509Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partAlito, Circuit Judge

I join part IID of the opinion of the court. I also agree with the court’s disposition of the plaintiffs evidentiary argument. See Maj. Op. at 1075-77. I dissent, however, from parts IIA — C of the court’s opinion.

I

My primary disagreement with the majority concerns the test for determining whether a defense motion for summary judgment or judgment as a matter of law should be granted in an employment discrimination case governed by the procedural scheme sanctioned in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973). Like several other courts of appeals {see…

2Cases cited35 opinions

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
St. Mary's Honor Center v. HicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1993

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