No. 20-172

Ukpai I. Ukpai v. Continental Automotive Systems US, Inc.

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-08-17
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response WaivedRelisted (2)
Tags: comparative-evidence disparate-treatment employment-discrimination hostile-work-environment mcdonnell-douglas retaliation similarly-situated summary-judgment
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity ERISA EmploymentDiscrimina
Latest Conference: 2020-12-11 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Can Courts find that two employees are not similarly situated though both employees performed the same conduct under the supervision of the same supervisor with the same set of rules and policies?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Can Courts find that two employees are not similarly situated though both employees performed the same conduct under the supervision of the same supervisor with the same set of rules and. policies? And, would such a ruling be consistent with the intent and meaning of the “Similarly Situated” concept or be so onerous as to violate the intent established in McDonnel/Green scheme by this Court? : 2.. Should courts make presumptions in favor of the moving party in a summary judgment proceeding?

Docket Entries

2020-12-14
Rehearing DENIED.
2020-11-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/11/2020.
2020-11-09
2020-10-13
Petition DENIED.
2020-09-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.
2020-09-09
Waiver of right of respondent Continental Automotive Systems US, Inc. to respond filed.
2020-08-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 16, 2020)

Attorneys

Continental Automotive Systems US, Inc.
Steven Z. CohenCohen, Lerner & Rabinovitz, P.C., Respondent
Steven Z. CohenCohen, Lerner & Rabinovitz, P.C., Respondent
Ukpai I. Ukpai
Ukpai I. Ukpai — Petitioner
Ukpai I. Ukpai — Petitioner