Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2159879
 
 

Footnotes (98)



 


 



Unmasking a Pretext for Res Ipsa Loquitur: A Proposal to Let Employment Discrimination Speak for Itself


William R. Corbett


Louisiana State University Law Center

October 10, 2012

American University Law Review, Forthcoming

Abstract:     
Has too much tort law been incorporated into the case law under the federal employment discrimination statutes? The debate on this issue has been reinvigorated by the Supreme Court’s decision in Staub v. Proctor Hospital, 131 S. Ct. 1186 (2011). In Staub the Court referred to the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, a federal employment discrimination statute, as a “federal tort.” The Court then adopted the tort doctrine of proximate cause as the standard for evaluating subordinate bias (or “cat’s paw”) liability. Staub was not the first case in which the Court has suggested that a federal employment discrimination law is a federal statutory tort, but it was the most express and direct statement. Moreover, the Court’s adoption of proximate cause, one of the most complicated, confusing, and criticized concepts in tort law, to analyze a prevalent issue in employment discrimination law is striking and provocative. Staub reinvigorates the debate about whether the Court and courts have imported too much tort law into employment discrimination law — the debate about the “tortification” of employment discrimination law.

Most discussions of tortification of discrimination law trace the origin to the Supreme Court’s discussion of torts causation standards in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989). However, it actually began much earlier. The ubiquitous pretext analysis, developed by the Court to analyze individual disparate treatment cases in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973), is a thinly veiled version of the tort doctrine res ipsa loquitur. Although there have been numerous critiques of the McDonnell Douglas analysis that have called for its abrogation, none have exposed it as the much-maligned tort doctrine. Evaluating McDonnell Douglas as res ipsa helps explain its weaknesses and shortcomings. After almost forty years of the pretext analysis, it is time to expel it from discrimination law. Abrogating the McDonnell Douglas analysis should be a significant first step in reconsidering the tortification of employment discrimination law.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 70

Keywords: Employment Discrimination, pretext, mixed motive, res ipsa loquitur

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: October 10, 2012  

Suggested Citation

Corbett, William R., Unmasking a Pretext for Res Ipsa Loquitur: A Proposal to Let Employment Discrimination Speak for Itself (October 10, 2012). American University Law Review, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2159879

Contact Information

William R. Corbett (Contact Author)
Louisiana State University Law Center ( email )
440 Law Center Building
Baton Rouge, LA 70803
United States
225-578-8723 (Phone)
225-578-5937 (Fax)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 450
Downloads: 57
Download Rank: 224,349
Footnotes:  98

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.407 seconds