How did the court treat Dee's attempt to establish a prima facie case of employment discrimination?
On what did both the trial court and the appellate court focus their analysis?
What did the plaintiff here fail to do in submitting his side of the case? How did this failure affect his claims?
If Dees had been laid off due to a reduction in force of all workers whose performance did not meet the defendant's standards, would the result, in this case, have been different? Explain.