United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019-07-30
29usc623: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed
Case and law context
Role: applied; posture: appeal from summary judgment for employer; result: claimant-lost; claim:
Uncertainty
None recorded
Misfit
The opinion addresses sex, age, state-law and retaliation theories together. This selected block preserves the ADEA evidentiary failure without importing Title VII mixed-motive reasoning.
B · Case × element grid
Top-level elements follow claim order in panels of up to six elements. Case rows repeat across panels. Every recorded block retains its holding and basis; multiple blocks are not merged into a case-level verdict. ✓ satisfied · ✗ not satisfied · ○ not reached · · not addressed. Muted blocks are not counted. Sub-element evidence remains on case and element pages.
Elements 1–6 of 31
| Case | Employer coverage and exclusions | Age forty or older | Hiring discharge or employment terms | Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment | Route-conditioned statutory f(1) and f(2) alternatives | Conditional state firefighter and law-enforcement hiring or retirement |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heisler v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. — 931 F.3d 786 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019 (29usc623: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 7–12 of 31
| Case | Age sixty-five executive or high-policymaker compulsory retirement | Judicial impact requirement to identify a particular practice | Judicial impact requirement of significant causal disparity | Covered employment agency | Covered labor organization | Opposition or participation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heisler v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. — 931 F.3d 786 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019 (29usc623: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 13–18 of 31
| Case | Judicial material-adversity standard for retaliation | Retaliatory causal connection | Agency referral discrimination | Membership classification referral or causing discrimination | Employer agency or union advertiser | Age-based notice or advertisement |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heisler v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. — 931 F.3d 786 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019 (29usc623: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 19–24 of 31
| Case | Wage reduction to comply | Employer agency union or combination maintaining a pension plan | Establish or maintain an employee pension benefit plan | Age-based accrual or allocation cessation or reduction | Subsection i pension qualifications and compliance | Conditional bona fide seniority system or benefit plan |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heisler v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. — 931 F.3d 786 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019 (29usc623: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 25–30 of 31
| Case | Narrow bona fide occupational qualification | Displayed scope and specialized exclusions | Charge filing waiver and remedies | Foreign workplace conflict with local law | Good cause for employer discharge or discipline | Judicial outside-applicant coverage limit where circuit precedent controls |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heisler v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. — 931 F.3d 786 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019 (29usc623: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 31–31 of 31
| Case | Reasonable factors other than age |
|---|---|
| Heisler v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. — 931 F.3d 786 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019 (29usc623: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) | · not addressed |
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heisler v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. — 931 F.3d 786 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019 — not · no-evidence (29usc623: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) | Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment | not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: no-evidence The court applies the ADEA but-for requirement and finds insufficient pretext evidence. This annotation is the ADEA component; Title VII/state-law components are not treated as identical legal standards. | pretext/inadequate-qualification-comparison | But there is evidence of awkward interviews and some unsavvy conduct, which is at least an arguable basis for Nationwide's purported motives.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_931.jsonl#/f3d/931/0786-01; Unicode character offsets [29089:29230] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bd7d6abcc578d40db50a1a656b87abe9556b06a3f8b2abc86266be2f2a7da446.She needed to use the qualifications comparison evidence to prove pretext, and she did not introduce enough evidence to meet her burden in that way.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_931.jsonl#/f3d/931/0786-01; Unicode character offsets [29231:29379] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bd7d6abcc578d40db50a1a656b87abe9556b06a3f8b2abc86266be2f2a7da446.Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment that Heisler failed to meet her burden of production to show pretext.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_931.jsonl#/f3d/931/0786-01; Unicode character offsets [29380:29502] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bd7d6abcc578d40db50a1a656b87abe9556b06a3f8b2abc86266be2f2a7da446. |