L.A. DRAPER & SON, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
WHEELABRATOR-FRYE, INC., A CORPORATION; HESSCO INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY, INC., A CORPORATION; FRED Z. HESTER, AN INDIVIDUAL, JOSEPH E. O'CALLAGHAN, AN INDIVIDUAL, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES

11th Cir. | 1987-07-15
No. 85-7658
Before HILL and HATCHETT, Circuit Judges and THOMAS , Senior District Judge.
821 F.2d 590 Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (1987) Negative Treatment
Cited by 41 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

On petition for rehearing the appellant, L.A. Draper & Sons, Inc., moves this court to clarify its disposition of the case with respect to defendant Hessco Industrial Supply, Inc., a corporation. After closely examining the record we have determined that neither the district court nor this court ever treated the claims against Hessco as separate from the claims against Hessco’s founder, Fred Z. Hester. Thus, no determination has been made regarding the degree to which Hessco’s potential liabilities and defenses may be differentiated from Hesters. Such a determination must be made in the first instance in district court. Accordingly, we clarify our earlier opinion by vacating the district court’s judgment in favor of Hessco and remanding the claims against Hessco to the district court for further proceedings, not inconsistent with the panel opinion in this case, 813 F. 2d 332 (11th Cir.1987).

In all other respects the petition for rehearing is DENIED.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By (22 total)

  • United Teachers OF Dade v. The Sch. Dist. OF Miami-Dade Cnty., 68 So. 3d 1003 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)
    …m present”). For this reason, it is well established in the field of discrimination that circumstantial evidence evaluated in the light of common experience may be relied upon to establish discriminatory motive. See Grigsby v. Reynolds Metals Co., 821 F. 2d 590, 594 (11th Cir.1987) (noting that “[t]he McDonnell Douglas-Burdine proof structure ‘was never intended to be rigid, mechanized, or ritualistic. Rather, it is merely a sensible, orderly way to evaluate the evidence in light of common experience as it…
  • Earley v. Champion Int'l Corp., 907 F.2d 1077 (11th Cir. 1990)
    …Southern Ductile Casting Corp., 849 F. 2d 1372, 1376 (11th Cir.1988). Summary judgments for defendants are not rare in employment discrimination cases. See, e.g., Mauter v. Hardy Corp., 825 F. 2d 1554 (11th Cir.1987); Grigsby v. Reynolds Metal Co., 821 F. 2d 590 (11th Cir.1987); Palmer v. District Bd. of Trustees of St. Petersburg Junior College, 748 F. 2d 595 (11th Cir.1984); Pace v. Southern Ry. Sys., 701 F. 2d 1383 (11th Cir.1983); Simmons v. McGuffey Nursing Home, Inc., 619 F. 2d 369, 371 (5th Cir.1980)…
  • Holifield v. Reno, 115 F.3d 1555 (11th Cir. 1997)
    …t issue. In this case, the defendant’s evidence of a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for its action is so strong as to rebut completely the inference raised by the plaintiffs prima facie case of retaliation. See Grigsby v. Reynolds Metals Co., 821 F. 2d 590, 596 (11th Cir.1987). The evidence supporting Holifield’s prima facie ease is simply not sufficient to create an issue of fact in light of the substantial evidence of lawful motive presented by the defendant. As a result, the defendant is entitled…

Previewing 3 of 22 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw