Opinion ID: 9267
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The parties' evidentiary burdens.

Text: 14 The ADEA makes it unlawful for an employer to discharge any individual or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's age. 5 The evidentiary burdens of each party in an ADEA case are well-established. A plaintiff must first present a prima facie case of employment discrimination. 6 If the plaintiff meets this burden, the employer must rebut the presumption of age discrimination by articulating a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for the adverse employment action. 7 If the employer presents such evidence, then the burden of production shifts back to the plaintiff to present probative evidence that the employer's stated reason was pretext. 8 15 In the present case, the district court assumed for summary judgment purposes, that the appellants had established a prima facie case, and therefore analyzed evidence only on the issue of pretext. It found that Davis and Brown had not met their burden of production on this issue, and granted summary judgment. Davis and Brown argue that this ruling was in error, and that they each presented sufficient evidence of pretext to survive summary judgment. CSC Logic maintains that Davis and Brown did not present sufficient evidence of pretext, and that they also did not even successfully present a prima facie case of age discrimination. We will address each stage of the case in turn. 16