A person who provides significant input and influence to a corporate decision-maker regarding adverse action against an employee is not thereby constituted as a decision-maker whose state of mind must be interrogated in determining the corporation's reasons for the adverse action, where that person lacked executive power or authority to make the relevant decision.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 47 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 47 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.