Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.

E166649

ADEA case United States Supreme Court case age discrimination case employment discrimination case

Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision that clarified the standards for proving age discrimination under the ADEA, particularly the role of pretext and circumstantial evidence in employment discrimination cases.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Surface forms Statements Referenced by

All labels observed (1)

Label	Occurrences
Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. canonical	2

Statements (47)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	ADEA case ⓘ United States Supreme Court case ⓘ age discrimination case ⓘ employment discrimination case ⓘ
abbreviation	ADEA ⓘ
citation	120 S. Ct. 2097 ⓘ 147 L. Ed. 2d 105 ⓘ 530 U.S. 133 ⓘ
country	United States of America ⓘ surface form: United States
court	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate	2000-06-12 ⓘ
decisionType	majority opinion ⓘ
docketNumber	99-536 ⓘ
employeeAgeGroup	over 40 ⓘ
employmentAction	termination of employment ⓘ
holding	A court may not require a plaintiff to introduce additional, independent evidence of discrimination beyond proof of pretext ⓘ A plaintiff’s prima facie case of discrimination combined with sufficient evidence that the employer’s stated reason is false may permit a finding of liability ⓘ Judgment as a matter of law is inappropriate when the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, would allow a reasonable jury to find discrimination ⓘ
importance	frequently cited in federal employment discrimination litigation ⓘ leading precedent on proof structure in ADEA cases ⓘ
issue	role of pretext evidence in employment discrimination cases ⓘ standard for proving age discrimination under the ADEA ⓘ use of circumstantial evidence to prove intentional discrimination ⓘ
jurisdiction	United States of America ⓘ surface form: United States
keyConcept	burden-shifting ⓘ circumstantial evidence ⓘ judgment as a matter of law ⓘ pretext ⓘ prima facie case of discrimination ⓘ
languageOfRecord	English ⓘ
legalArea	age discrimination law ⓘ employment law ⓘ federal anti-discrimination law ⓘ
lowerCourt	United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ⓘ
lowerCourtDisposition	judgment as a matter of law for the employer ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy	Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ surface form: Justice Sandra Day O’Connor
partyType	corporate employer ⓘ individual employee ⓘ
petitioner	Roger Reeves ⓘ
proceduralPosture	review of a judgment as a matter of law under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50 ⓘ
respondent	Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. ⓘ
result	judgment of the Court of Appeals reversed ⓘ
standardApplied	McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework ⓘ
statuteInterpreted	Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 ⓘ
supremeCourtDisposition	reversal of judgment as a matter of law ⓘ
term	October Term 1999 ⓘ
vote	9-0 ⓘ

Referenced by (2)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green → influenced → Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. ⓘ

Texas Dept. of Community Affairs v. Burdine → citedIn → Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. ⓘ