SCHOLES

v.

ALLRED ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. O'Grady, 857 F.2d 383 (7th Cir. 1988)
  …2] uphold the designated rates of prejudgment interest as within the discretion of the district court. Conway v. Electro Switch Corp., 825 F. 2d 593, 600-03 (1st Cir.1987); EEOC v. Rath Packing Co., 787 F. 2d 318, 334 n. 14 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 910, 107 S.Ct. 307, 93 L.Ed.2d 282 (1986); EEOC v. County of Erie, 751 F. 2d 79, 82 (2d Cir.1984). Prejudgment interest is designed to make the plaintiff whole by compensating her for the loss of the time value of her money. Coston v. Plitt Theatres, I…
• Langston Bradley v. Pizzaco OF Neb., Inc., 926 F.2d 714 (8th Cir. 1991)
  …ce on these statistics to prove a prima facie case of disparate impact was not misplaced. See Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321, 330, 97 S.Ct. 2720, 2727, 53 L.Ed.2d 786 (1977); EEOC v. Rath Packing Co., 787 F. 2d 318, 336 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 910, 107 S.Ct. 307, 93 L.Ed.2d 282 (1986). General population statistics are highly significant where there is no reason to believe the disqualifying characteristic potential job applicants possess differs markedly from the national population. Bradley…