No. 18-353

Tate Clark v. Southwest Airlines Company

Lower Court: Fifth Circuit
Docketed: 2018-09-18
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: anderson-v-liberty-lobby appellate-review causation-standard civil-procedure district-court evidence-standard factual-inferences fmla-retaliation genuine-issue-for-trial judicial-review mixed-motive pretext prima-facie-case standard-of-review summary-judgment
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Immigration
Latest Conference: 2018-11-09
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the District Court and Court of Appeals failed to view the evidence presented in conjunction with Respondent's motion for summary judgment in the light most favorable to Petitioner and weighed the evidence

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION PRESENTED Itis well settled law that the evidence in support or opposition of a summary judgment motion and the factual inferences drawn therefrom are to be viewed by a court in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd, et al. v. Zenith Radio Corp. et al., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986). Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). At the summary judgment stage the judge's function is not to weigh the evidence and determine the truth of the matter but to determine whether there is a genuine issue for trial. Id. at 249. Therefore the question presented is whether the District Court and Court of Appeals failed to view the evidence presented in conjunction with Respondent’s motion for summary judgment in the light most favorable to Petitioner and weighed the evidence.

Docket Entries

2018-11-13
Petition DENIED.
2018-10-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/9/2018.
2018-10-17
Waiver of right of respondent Southwest Airlines Company to respond filed.
2018-07-17
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 18, 2018)

Attorneys

Southwest Airlines Company
Bruce A. GriggsOgletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., Respondent
Bruce A. GriggsOgletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., Respondent
Tate Clark
John Foster MeltonThe Melton Law Firm, PLLC, Petitioner
John Foster MeltonThe Melton Law Firm, PLLC, Petitioner