A decision maker’s remarks that he did “not want to hire any more foreigners” and, in a demeaning tone, that he could not understand what the Pakistani-born plaintiff said because of his accent, were admissible as indirect evidence “probative of discriminatory bias when determining, along with other evidence,” if the decision maker’s reasons for promoting a white male instead of the foreign-born employee were pretextual, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held Jan. 5 ( Hasham v. California State Bd. of Equalization, 10th Cir., No. 98-3193, 1/5/00).

Zia U. Hasham worked as an auditor for the California State Board of Equalization in its Chicago office, one of three out-of-state offices maintained by CBOE to audit companies located outside California but doing business there and therefore possibly liable for California sales and use taxes. He sued under Title VII, charging national origin discrimination, after he was denied a promotion to a supervisory position in CBOE’s Houston office.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]