PRIMA-FACIE, EVIDENCE, CASE Latin for at first view. Evidence that is sufficient to raise a presumption of fact or to establish the fact in question unless rebutted. A prima-facie case is a lawsuit that alleges facts adequate to prove the underlying conduct supporting the cause of action and thereby prevail. Belows an example dealing with employment discrimination claims. A plaintiff can establish a prima facie case of race discrimination under Title VII by establishing that (1) he or she belongs to a racial minority; (2) he or she applied and was qualified for a job for which the employer was seeking applicants; (3) he or she was rejected for the position despite his or her qualifications; and (4) the position remained open after his or her rejection and the employer continued to seek applications from other people with similar qualifications to the plaintiff. McDonnell Douglas v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802 (1973). In Texas Dept. of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 253 (1981), the Supreme Court stated that[t]he burden of establishing a prima facie case of disparate treatment is not onerous. After the plaintiff has established a prima facie case, the burden of production shifts to the employer to articulate a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the plaintiffs rejection. Id. If the employer sustains the burden, the plaintiff then has the opportunity to present evidence showing that the employers stated reason for the rejection was merely pretextual. Id.; see also McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 807; Lindahl, 930 F.2d at 1437 (The defendants articulation of a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason serves . . . to shift the burden back to the plaintiff to raise a genuine factual question as to whether the proffered reason is pretextual.) (quoting Lowe, 775 F.2d at 1008). The third step does not require that a plaintiff prove that he was rejected because of his protected status. The plaintiff must only show in step three that despite his qualifications, he was rejected. McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 802. The two standards are quite different. The McDonnell Douglas test merely requires that a plaintiff raise an inference of disparate treatment to establish a prima facie case, not actual proof of such treatment. lectlaw/def2/p078.htm
Posted on: Sun, 18 May 2014 03:55:24 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015