Legal Opinion
Catharina F. Costa v. Desert Palace, Inc., Dba Caesars Palace Hotel & Casino
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided August 2, 2002No. 99-15645PublishedCited by 234 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
McKEOWN, Circuit Judge
We agreed to hear this case en banc1 primarily to examine the legal standard for proof of a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In this classic instance of what has been termed a “mixed-motive” case, the employer, Caesars Palace Hotel and Casino (“Caesars”), terminated Catharina Costa, the only woman in her bargaining unit, citing disciplinary problems. Costa argued, and the jury agreed, that sex was “a motivating factor” in her termination. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(m). Because Caesars failed to establish…
2Cases cited62 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme 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
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by234 opinions
- Rovilma Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2005
- Desert Palace, Inc. v. CostaSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- George McGinest v. Gte Service Corp. Mike BiggsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Bates v. United Parcel Service, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Sylvia Dominguez-Curry v. Nevada Transportation Department Roc StaceyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
229 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.