AND · 42usc2000e-2:qualified
Doctrinal element from McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (411 U.S. 792, 802 (1973)), ruling out lack of baseline job qualification as the most common non-discriminatory reason for non-selection or discharge.
Exact element source
to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individualSource:
docroot/ir/usc/title42.jsonl#title42_sec2000e-2; Unicode character offsets [128:184] (end exclusive); SHA-256 7b026a9ac957c5491602d868578271db8730b4c98650f1a4007b2e7430194c8b.Routes and case patterns
| Route | Definition | Merits instance blocks | Distinct merits cases | Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unclassified route provisional; 2 observed cases | no definition yet | 0 Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 2 | 0 | Used only in non-merits blocks (2). Excluded context examples:Ginger v. District of Columbia — 477 F. Supp. 2d 41 (2007) · United States District Court for the District of Columbia · 2007 — not reached · basis not recorded (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted Hiatt v. Colorado Seminary — 858 F.3d 1307 (2017) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2017 — not reached · basis not recorded (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted |
| _whole accepted; provisional (1 case) | The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. | 1 Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 0 | 1 | Doe v. C.A.R.S Protection Plus, Inc. — 527 F.3d 358 (2008) · United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008 — satisfied · conceded (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted |
| performance-and-expectations provisional; 6 observed cases | Whether the plaintiff was qualified or meeting legitimate expectations, shown by record, tenure or promotion. | 6 Satisfied 5; not satisfied 1; excluded context 0 | 6 | Glenn v. Raymour — 832 F. Supp. 2d 539 (2011) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania · 2011 — satisfied · conceded (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted Evans v. Staples, Inc. — 375 F. Supp. 3d 117 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted Henderson v. Mass. Bay Transp. Auth. — 384 F. Supp. 3d 199 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts · 2019 — satisfied · triable (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted |
How courts decided this element
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ginger v. District of Columbia — 477 F. Supp. 2d 41 (2007) · United States District Court for the District of Columbia · 2007 — not reached (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Qualified for the position / meeting legitimate employer expectations | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / merits claim: (a)(1); 2000e-3(a) | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| Glenn v. Raymour — 832 F. Supp. 2d 539 (2011) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania · 2011 — satisfied · conceded (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Qualified for the position / meeting legitimate employer expectations | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: conceded; claim: (a)(1) | qualified/recently-promoted | Mirth subsequently recommended Glenn for a CDI position, and Hazeldine promoted Glenn to the position effective January 21, 2008.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_2d_832.jsonl#/f-supp-2d/832/0539-01; Unicode character offsets [3940:4069] (end exclusive); SHA-256 ad682cd3ab80d3bbd67d0ed1b42af8b4626a1b1756981872f0895f0ffadff61f.For purposes of the summary judgment motion, Glenn has satisfied the first three steps of his prima facie case — he is a member of a protected class, is qualified for his Customer Delivery Inspector position, and was discharged from that position by Raymours.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_2d_832.jsonl#/f-supp-2d/832/0539-01; Unicode character offsets [20738:20997] (end exclusive); SHA-256 ad682cd3ab80d3bbd67d0ed1b42af8b4626a1b1756981872f0895f0ffadff61f. |
| Evans v. Staples, Inc. — 375 F. Supp. 3d 117 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Qualified for the position / meeting legitimate employer expectations | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded; claim: (a) | hired-after-credential-review-and-phone-interview | Plaintiff was initially interviewed for the position over the phone by Ms. Dagg.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_375.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/375/0117-01; Unicode character offsets [1061:1141] (end exclusive); SHA-256 6049c9626d71ce89b276768b61451e839fe24594dfab66b83a74acb956c07090.On May 22, 2015, Ms. Dagg terminated Plaintiff's contract, purportedly due to her lack of technical skills.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_375.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/375/0117-01; Unicode character offsets [1678:1785] (end exclusive); SHA-256 6049c9626d71ce89b276768b61451e839fe24594dfab66b83a74acb956c07090.It is plausible that she was qualified for her position since Ms. Dagg hired her after reviewing her credentials and conducting a phone interview.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_375.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/375/0117-01; Unicode character offsets [13619:13765] (end exclusive); SHA-256 6049c9626d71ce89b276768b61451e839fe24594dfab66b83a74acb956c07090. |
| Henderson v. Mass. Bay Transp. Auth. — 384 F. Supp. 3d 199 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts · 2019 — satisfied · triable (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Qualified for the position / meeting legitimate employer expectations | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: triable; claim: (a)(1) Covers both the "qualified" prong and the First Circuit's fourth prong (position filled by someone with similar or inferior qualifications); the MBTA contested both on the interview scores. | low-interview-score-on-largely-subjective-questions-does-not-defeat-prima-facie-case | From 2000 to 2005, he served as a temporary supervisor.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_384.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/384/0199-01; Unicode character offsets [2355:2410] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f2ca6c3947bf244a4721dd31600d039f6edeee5495b8fbf1162bb88bd7df3405.A review of the answers to this question does not reveal an objective basis for scoring Melchionda an 8 and Henderson a 5.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_384.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/384/0199-01; Unicode character offsets [17224:17346] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f2ca6c3947bf244a4721dd31600d039f6edeee5495b8fbf1162bb88bd7df3405.Here, Melchionda got an 8 (out of 10) and Henderson got a 4, which made sense because Henderson provided fewer specifics.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_384.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/384/0199-01; Unicode character offsets [16532:16653] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f2ca6c3947bf244a4721dd31600d039f6edeee5495b8fbf1162bb88bd7df3405.After examining Melchionda's, Higgins's, and Henderson's answers, the Court cannot say that Henderson's score was based on objective criteria that would demonstrate he was not qualified for the job or similarly qualified to the successful candidates.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_384.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/384/0199-01; Unicode character offsets [17347:17597] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f2ca6c3947bf244a4721dd31600d039f6edeee5495b8fbf1162bb88bd7df3405.Henderson's low score in the interview therefore does not defeat his prima facie case.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_384.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/384/0199-01; Unicode character offsets [17730:17816] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f2ca6c3947bf244a4721dd31600d039f6edeee5495b8fbf1162bb88bd7df3405. |
| Turner v. Barber-Scotia College — 604 F. Supp. 1450 (1985) · United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina · 1985 — not · proved (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Qualified for the position / meeting legitimate employer expectations | not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; claim: (a) Credentials were "outstanding"; the element fails on the performance/expectations limb, defined by the employer's sincere but subjective view that the professors no longer served its community mission. Court calls this the hardest question in the case. The third fact is mixed: its first sentence (criticisms not objectively proved) supports the element, its second (the president's conviction was sincere) is what the court relies on; tagged by the court's use. | legitimate-expectations/subjective-institutional-fit-after-labor-dispute | For years Turner and Goetzman were two of the top professors at BSC. Their credentials relative to the other faculty members were outstanding, and they earned the respect and admiration of students, faculty, and administration.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_604.jsonl#/f-supp/604/1450-01; Unicode character offsets [20104:20331] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43ff772c2e3fbfe3210fd8995743b1d10c89d6d34fc9ed5d5ad773f37cb94da8.Because of these and other tensions between administration and faculty, Turner and Goetzman became deeply involved in attempts to unionize the BSC faculty. The attempt failed, and thereafter relations between the two professors and the administration were strained.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_604.jsonl#/f-supp/604/1450-01; Unicode character offsets [20671:20936] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43ff772c2e3fbfe3210fd8995743b1d10c89d6d34fc9ed5d5ad773f37cb94da8.At trial BSC failed to prove by objective evidence that these criticisms were well founded. However, at least as concerned President McLean, the conviction that Turner and Goetzman were not fulfilling their proper roles in the BSC community was sincere, even if highly subjective.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_604.jsonl#/f-supp/604/1450-01; Unicode character offsets [22989:23269] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43ff772c2e3fbfe3210fd8995743b1d10c89d6d34fc9ed5d5ad773f37cb94da8.It is clear that after the contract and labor disputes of 1978-1979, Turner and Goetzman became aloof from that community and diverted from that goal.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_604.jsonl#/f-supp/604/1450-01; Unicode character offsets [24296:24446] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43ff772c2e3fbfe3210fd8995743b1d10c89d6d34fc9ed5d5ad773f37cb94da8.Although both were clearly well qualified for the job, a question arises whether near the end of their tenures (used in the nontechnical sense of the word) at BSC, Turner and Goetzman were performing satisfactorily according to the legitimate expectations of BSC.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_604.jsonl#/f-supp/604/1450-01; Unicode character offsets [19779:20042] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43ff772c2e3fbfe3210fd8995743b1d10c89d6d34fc9ed5d5ad773f37cb94da8.In determining whether Turner and Goetzman were satisfying BSC’s legitimate expectations, the Court is constrained to give great credence to President McLean’s articulation of what those expectations are.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_604.jsonl#/f-supp/604/1450-01; Unicode character offsets [23828:24032] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43ff772c2e3fbfe3210fd8995743b1d10c89d6d34fc9ed5d5ad773f37cb94da8.Thus, the Court is unable to conclude that, at the time they were fired, Turner and Goetzman were fulfilling the legitimate expectations of BSC, and is unable to infer from the evidence that race was a determining factor in the decision to discharge them.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_604.jsonl#/f-supp/604/1450-01; Unicode character offsets [25715:25970] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43ff772c2e3fbfe3210fd8995743b1d10c89d6d34fc9ed5d5ad773f37cb94da8. |
| Breech v. Alabama Power Co. — 962 F. Supp. 1447 (1997) · United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama · 1997 — satisfied · conceded (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Qualified for the position / meeting legitimate employer expectations | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: conceded; claim: (a)(1),(c)(3),(m); 2000e(j); 2000e-3(a) | qualified/long-tenure-in-position | he became a Plant Control Operator in May, 1982. He remained a Plant Control Operator, a part of the Operations Department, until he was terminated on July 24,1991.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_962.jsonl#/f-supp/962/1447-01; Unicode character offsets [4848:5012] (end exclusive); SHA-256 c9d3cf4a8e3b5373cb13844fbe0d43429324dce0876d20c5fdba3f4d459c1acf.Breech has satisfied the first three elements of a prima facie case of discriminatory discharge.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_962.jsonl#/f-supp/962/1447-01; Unicode character offsets [31799:31895] (end exclusive); SHA-256 c9d3cf4a8e3b5373cb13844fbe0d43429324dce0876d20c5fdba3f4d459c1acf. |
| Doe v. C.A.R.S Protection Plus, Inc. — 527 F.3d 358 (2008) · United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008 — satisfied · conceded (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Qualified for the position / meeting legitimate employer expectations | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: conceded; claim: (a); 2000e(k) | qualified/undisputed | Neither party disputes that Doe has met her burden on the first three elements of a prima facie pregnancy discrimination case: 1) she is or was pregnant and that her employer knew she was pregnant; 2) she was qualified for her job; and, 3) she suffered an adverse employment decision.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_527.jsonl#/f3d/527/0358-01; Unicode character offsets [13825:14109] (end exclusive); SHA-256 7403bc10d85e1df0ad37ec6894b9137591d0949906c59e93cb1365fcf01b44bb. |
| Hiatt v. Colorado Seminary — 858 F.3d 1307 (2017) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2017 — not reached (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Qualified for the position / meeting legitimate employer expectations | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / merits claim: (a)(1); 2000e-3(a) | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks — 509 U.S. 502 (1993) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1993 — satisfied · conceded (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Qualified for the position / meeting legitimate employer expectations | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: conceded; claim: (a)(1); party: plaintiff Melvin Hicks, shift commander (respondent); subject: party=plaintiff Melvin Hicks, shift commander (respondent) | prima-facie/satisfactory-record-before-new-supervisors | Prior to these personnel changes respondent had enjoyed a satisfactory employment record, but soon thereafter became the subject of repeated, and increasingly severe, disciplinary actions.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_509.jsonl#/us/509/0502-01; Unicode character offsets [1056:1244] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f6ba1643673c63e64401ed4ea3db1f6647ecf24cb97fdf31426b87eb7aa43ab3. |
Court interpretations
interpretation
In establishing the third element of his prima facie case, Glenn need only show that he was discharged from a position for which he was qualified.
Glenn v. Raymour — 832 F. Supp. 2d 539 (2011) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania · 2011 (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed)
In establishing the third element of his prima facie case, Glenn need only show that he was discharged from a position for which he was qualified.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_2d_832.jsonl#/f-supp-2d/832/0539-01; Unicode character offsets [40819:40965] (end exclusive); SHA-256 ad682cd3ab80d3bbd67d0ed1b42af8b4626a1b1756981872f0895f0ffadff61f.Doctrinal element from McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (411 U.S. 792, 802 (1973)), ruling out lack of baseline job qualification as the most common non-discriminatory reason for non-selection or discharge.
interpretation
Although both were clearly well qualified for the job, a question arises whether near the end of their tenures (used in the nontechnical sense of the word) at BSC, Turner and Goetzman were performing satisfactorily according to the legitimate expectations of BSC.
Turner v. Barber-Scotia College — 604 F. Supp. 1450 (1985) · United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina · 1985 (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed)
Although both were clearly well qualified for the job, a question arises whether near the end of their tenures (used in the nontechnical sense of the word) at BSC, Turner and Goetzman were performing satisfactorily according to the legitimate expectations of BSC.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_604.jsonl#/f-supp/604/1450-01; Unicode character offsets [19779:20042] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43ff772c2e3fbfe3210fd8995743b1d10c89d6d34fc9ed5d5ad773f37cb94da8.Doctrinal element from McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (411 U.S. 792, 802 (1973)), ruling out lack of baseline job qualification as the most common non-discriminatory reason for non-selection or discharge.
interpretation
In determining whether Turner and Goetzman were satisfying BSC’s legitimate expectations, the Court is constrained to give great credence to President McLean’s articulation of what those expectations are.
Turner v. Barber-Scotia College — 604 F. Supp. 1450 (1985) · United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina · 1985 (42usc2000e-2: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed)
In determining whether Turner and Goetzman were satisfying BSC’s legitimate expectations, the Court is constrained to give great credence to President McLean’s articulation of what those expectations are.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_604.jsonl#/f-supp/604/1450-01; Unicode character offsets [23828:24032] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43ff772c2e3fbfe3210fd8995743b1d10c89d6d34fc9ed5d5ad773f37cb94da8.Doctrinal element from McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (411 U.S. 792, 802 (1973)), ruling out lack of baseline job qualification as the most common non-discriminatory reason for non-selection or discharge.