St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks
E166648
St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks is a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court decision that tightened the burden on plaintiffs in employment discrimination cases by holding that proving an employer’s stated reason is pretextual does not automatically establish intentional discrimination.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks canonical | 2 |
| St. Mary’s Honor Ctr. v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502 (1993) | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T1461665 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks Context triple: [McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, influenced, St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks]
-
A.
Adkins v. Children’s Hospital
Adkins v. Children’s Hospital is a 1923 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a minimum wage law for women in the District of Columbia, marking a key moment in the Lochner-era protection of freedom of contract.
-
B.
Corrigan v. Buckley
Corrigan v. Buckley is a 1926 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the enforceability of racially restrictive covenants in property deeds, paving the way for widespread legalized housing segregation until later overturned in effect by subsequent civil rights rulings.
-
C.
Argersinger v. Hamlin
Argersinger v. Hamlin is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the right to counsel to defendants in misdemeanor cases that may result in imprisonment.
-
D.
Maryland v. Wirtz
Maryland v. Wirtz was a 1968 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the extension of federal minimum wage and overtime provisions to employees of state-operated schools and hospitals under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
-
E.
Lau v. Nichols
Lau v. Nichols is a landmark 1974 U.S. Supreme Court case that held public schools must take affirmative steps to help non-English-speaking students overcome language barriers to ensure equal educational opportunity under federal civil rights law.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks Target entity description: St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks is a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court decision that tightened the burden on plaintiffs in employment discrimination cases by holding that proving an employer’s stated reason is pretextual does not automatically establish intentional discrimination.
-
A.
Adkins v. Children’s Hospital
Adkins v. Children’s Hospital is a 1923 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a minimum wage law for women in the District of Columbia, marking a key moment in the Lochner-era protection of freedom of contract.
-
B.
Corrigan v. Buckley
Corrigan v. Buckley is a 1926 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the enforceability of racially restrictive covenants in property deeds, paving the way for widespread legalized housing segregation until later overturned in effect by subsequent civil rights rulings.
-
C.
Argersinger v. Hamlin
Argersinger v. Hamlin is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the right to counsel to defendants in misdemeanor cases that may result in imprisonment.
-
D.
Maryland v. Wirtz
Maryland v. Wirtz was a 1968 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the extension of federal minimum wage and overtime provisions to employees of state-operated schools and hospitals under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
-
E.
Lau v. Nichols
Lau v. Nichols is a landmark 1974 U.S. Supreme Court case that held public schools must take affirmative steps to help non-English-speaking students overcome language barriers to ensure equal educational opportunity under federal civil rights law.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (44)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Title VII case
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ employment discrimination case ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1993-04-20 ⓘ |
| burdenOfPersuasion | remains at all times with the plaintiff in a Title VII disparate-treatment case. ⓘ |
| burdenShiftingFramework |
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
ⓘ
surface form:
applies the McDonnell Douglas framework.
|
| causeOfAction | alleged race discrimination in employment under Title VII ⓘ |
| citation | 509 U.S. 502 ⓘ |
| citationStyle |
St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
St. Mary’s Honor Ctr. v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502 (1993)
|
| clarifies | the effect of proving pretext under the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework. ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decidedDate | 1993-06-25 ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1993-06-25 ⓘ |
| decisionType | 5–4 decision ⓘ |
| dissentingOpinionBy |
David H. Souter
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice David H. Souter
|
| docketNumber | 92-602 ⓘ |
| effectOnPlaintiffs | tightened the burden on employment discrimination plaintiffs. ⓘ |
| holding |
A plaintiff’s showing that the employer’s proffered reason is false or pretextual does not compel a finding of intentional discrimination as a matter of law.
ⓘ
The trier of fact must still be persuaded that the employer intentionally discriminated against the plaintiff. ⓘ |
| influenced | later Supreme Court decisions on employment discrimination burdens of proof ⓘ |
| issue | Whether rejection of the employer’s proffered reasons mandates judgment for the Title VII plaintiff. ⓘ |
| joinedByInDissent |
Byron R. White
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Byron R. White
Harry A. Blackmun ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Harry A. Blackmun
John Paul Stevens ⓘ
surface form:
Justice John Paul Stevens
|
| joinedByInMajority |
William H. Rehnquist
ⓘ
surface form:
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist
Anthony M. Kennedy ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy
Clarence Thomas ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Clarence Thomas
Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor
|
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| language | English ⓘ |
| legalArea |
civil rights law
ⓘ
employment discrimination law ⓘ |
| lowerCourt | United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy |
Antonin Scalia
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Antonin Scalia
|
| page | 502 ⓘ |
| partyTypePetitioner | state-operated correctional facility ⓘ |
| petitioner | St. Mary’s Honor Center ⓘ |
| proceduralPosture | review of a judgment of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ⓘ |
| reporter |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
U.S.
|
| respondent | Melvin Hicks ⓘ |
| statuteInterpreted | Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ⓘ |
| subsequentCitation | often cited in federal employment discrimination cases ⓘ |
| volume | 509 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks Description of subject: St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks is a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court decision that tightened the burden on plaintiffs in employment discrimination cases by holding that proving an employer’s stated reason is pretextual does not automatically establish intentional discrimination.
Referenced by (3)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks
→
citationStyle
→
St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
this entity surface form:
St. Mary’s Honor Ctr. v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502 (1993)