US-CA5 · jury_instructions
5th Cir. Pattern Jury Instr. (Civil) 11.17
ADEA—Retaliation
The ADEA also proscribes retaliation against employees for engaging in an activity protected by the
statute.
1
The ADEA does not authorize liability for a
mixed-motive age discrimination claim.
2
The holding in
Gross has been applied to preclude a mixed-motive
ADEA retaliation claim.
3
The jury charge should use
the but-for causation standard for an ADEA retaliation
claim and not mixed-motive.
4
1Gomez-Perez v. Potter , 553 U.S. 474, 486–87 (2008).
2See Gross , 557 U.S. at 178.
3See Barton v. Zimmer , Inc. , 662 F .3d 448, 455–56 (7th Cir. 2011).
4See Pattern Jury Instruction 11.5; Pattern Jury Instruction 11.11.
Provenance
- Source
- lb5.uscourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-19
- Edition
- 2026-08-19
- Content hash
3c2d14d04d04fa9803cf59f89bb3271f8404d7636778abcdf142a9ca5ad48068
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.