Case Citator › DiCarlo v. Potter

DiCarlo v. Potter

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Abrogated
Court
Sixth Circuit
Citation
358 F.3d 408
Decided
Confirmed treatments
2
Flagged citations read
43 of 43
Citing cases (total)
43
Treatment dates
2009–2017
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. All 43 flagged citations have been read. DiCarlo v. Potter was abrogated on the burden of persuasion in age discrimination claims by Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. The Sixth Circuit recognized that change in Scheick v. Tecumseh Public Schools.
More on how this was screened

Bush v. Compass Group USA also questioned DiCarlo's temporal-proximity reasoning. Both treatments are listed below; later courts continue to apply DiCarlo's unaffected rules.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

43 later cases cite DiCarlo v. Potter; 43 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on DiCarlo v. Potter?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Abrogated

  • The Supreme Court required but-for causation and kept the burden of persuasion with the ADEA plaintiff, displacing DiCarlo's contrary rule.

    Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    To establish a disparate-treatment claim under the plain language of the ADEA, therefore, a plaintiff must prove that age was the “but-for” cause of the employer’s adverse decision. ... The burden of persuasion does not shift to the employer to show that it would have taken the action regardless of age, even when a plaintiff has produced some evidence that age was one motivating factor in that decision.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Questioned

  • The Sixth Circuit identified an unresolved conflict between DiCarlo and Skrjanc over what temporal proximity can prove in an FMLA retaliation claim.

    Bush v. Compass Group USA · Sixth Circuit · filed

    Thus, DiCarlo and Skrjanc cannot both be correct; either temporal proximity evidence is sufficient to both establish a prima facie showing of FMLA retaliation, and rebut an employer’s proffered non-discriminatory reasons for the adverse employment action, or it is insufficient to do either. We need not resolve this conflict now, however, because the alleged temporal proximity between Bush’s FMLA leave and his termination does not establish a prima facie showing of retaliation when viewed against the record as a whole.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads DiCarlo v. Potter and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace