Legal Opinion
Nicholson v. Hyannis Air Service, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 8, 2009No. 08-15959PublishedCited by 68 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REINHARDT, Circuit Judge:
Tiffany Anne Nicholson alleges that her former employer Cape Air discriminated against her on account of her sex when it suspended her from flying the two-pilot ATR 42 airplane on Cape Air’s Guam and Micronesia routes. The district court granted Cape Air’s motion for summary-judgment, finding that Nicholson could not establish a prima facie case of discrimination, nor that Cape Air’s explanation for its disciplinary action was a pretext for discrimination. She appeals the grant of summary judgment to Cape Air. We reverse.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Defendant-Appellee Hyannis…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Francisco Vasquez v. County of Los Angeles, Erroneously Sued as Los Angeles County Board of SupervisorsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation E.J. Bartells Company, a Washington Corporation A.P. Green Refractories Company, School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation, and Fibreboard Corp., a Delaware Corporation as Successor in Interest to the Paraffine Companies, Inc., Pabco Products, Inc., Fibreboard Paper Products Corporation, Plant Rubber & Asbestos Works and Plant Rubber & Asbestos Co., School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation Armstrong Cork Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation Atlas Asbestos Company, Inc., a Canadian Corporation, and Keene Corporation, a New York Corporation Individually and as Successor in Interest to the Baldwin Ehret Hill Company, School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation Armstrong Cork Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation Atlas Asbestos Company, Inc., a Canadian Corporation, and Us Gypsum Company, a Delaware Corporation, School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation Armstrong Cork Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation Atlas Asbestos Company, Inc., a Canadian Corporation, and Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corporation, School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation Armstrong Cork Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation Atlas Asbestos Company, Inc., a Canadian Corporation, and Flintkote Company, a Delaware Corporation, School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation Atlas Asbestos Company, Inc., a Canadian Corporation, and Armstrong Cork Company, Inc., a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by68 opinions
- Earl v. Nielsen Media Research, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Patricia Campbell v. Edu-HiCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- United States v. Figueroa-CartagenaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2010
- Demaree v. PedersonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- You v. Longs Drugs Stores California, LLCDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 2013
63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.