cases/29usc623/f3d-925-1240-davis-dc.case

Source: cases/29usc623/f3d-925-1240-davis-dc.case

Case source: https://www.neochart.com/catalog/cases/f3d/volume_925/1240_01/index.html

Verbatim annotated passages

They have abandoned their age-based claims, but appeal the summary judgment in the Agency's favor on the race discrimination claims.

Exact source text

casedsl 1

case /f3d/925/1240-01
  name Davis v. District of Columbia
  cite 925 F.3d 1240 (2019)
  court United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
  date 2019-06-07
  url catalog/cases/f3d/volume_925/1240_01/index.html
  source ir/caselaw/f3d_925.jsonl sha1=12e78ee29f0f38235f307fecae5f44a4de69cd2f chars=60000

law 29usc623
  role background
  posture appellate review of disparate-impact issues
  result not-decided

element enforcement : not-satisfied [waived]
  role background
  scope procedural
  variant appeal/age-claims-abandoned
  held @458..590 | They have abandoned their age-based claims, but appeal the summary judgment in the Agency's favor on the race discrimination claims.
  gloss The appellate opinion expressly says the age claims were abandoned. Its Title VII remand is not an ADEA impact determination.

misfit The merits remand concerns racial impact under Title VII only. Recording the statistics issue as an ADEA comparator or hypothetical merits holding would misidentify the claim actually before the court.