A well-tied tie is the first serious step in life...
Oscar Wilde
Recently we argued a case before the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals that the Court considered so important that it was heard en banc; in other words, all eleven judges who serve on that court heard the appeal (instead of the usual panel of just three judges). The case was Chapman v. AI Transport, 229 F.3d 1012 (11th Cir. 2000) and the key issue was whether employers can rely on "subjective criteria" when defending personnel decisions.
Subjective criteria are ones that require the decision-maker to use his judgment (e.g., which candidate had "better communication skills"). For example, can you defend a hiring decision on the ground that the 20 year-old you hired made a "better impression" during his interview than the 50 year-old plaintiff? Or, do you have to stick to "objective criteria," such as who had more years of experience or better credentials (e.g., a degree).
