Hargett v. Infor (US), Inc.
Case Details
- Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
- 440 Civil Rights: Other
- Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
- Unknown
- Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
- summary judgment
- State
- Delaware
- Circuit
- Third Circuit
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Claim Types
Outcome
The court granted summary judgment for the defendant employer on plaintiff's ADEA and DDEA age discrimination claims, finding insufficient evidence that age was a but-for cause of the plaintiff's discharge.
What This Ruling Means
Hargett v. Infor (US), Inc. — Court Ruling Summary
What Happened
An employee named Hargett sued Infor (US), Inc., claiming the company fired them because of their age. The employee filed complaints under federal and state age discrimination laws, arguing that age was the reason they lost their job.
What the Court Decided
The court sided with the employer. The judge ruled that Hargett did not present enough evidence to prove age was the deciding factor in the firing. Without clear proof connecting the termination directly to age discrimination, the court dismissed the case in the employer's favor. No damages were awarded.
Why This Matters for Workers
This case shows that winning an age discrimination lawsuit requires strong evidence that age was the main reason for termination. Simply believing you were treated unfairly because of your age may not be enough—employees typically need documents, statements, or other concrete proof showing the employer's decision was based on age rather than other job-related factors. Workers should carefully document any comments or actions that suggest age-based treatment.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Similar Rulings
Browse Related
Facing something similar at work?
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 3 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.