With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". (3) plaintiff was terminated; and (4) the employer assigned, at least temporarily, a younger person with no better credentials to do the same work. Hagtof v. Northwest Rehabilitation, Inc., 910 F.2d 492, 493 (8th Cir.1990). See, e.g., McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973). Once the plaintiff proves her prima facie case, the employer must come forward with a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the dismissal. If the employer does so, the plaintiff must set forth specific facts which show that the employer's stated reason is merely a pretext for intentional discrimination. Texas Dep 't of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 256, 101 S.Ct. 1089, 1095, 67 L.Ed.2d 207 (1981). 11 .See Biggins, - U.S. at -, 113 S:Ct. at 1706 (<HOLDING>) (emphasis in original). 12 . Schibursky makes

A: holding that age discrimination is not a personal injury tort
B: holding that if the plaintiff makes out a prima facie case of age discrimination the employer must show that the discharge was based on reasonable factors other than age  and if the employer meets that burden the plaintiff must show that age was a determining factor in the discharge
C: holding that when the employers decision is wholly motivated by factors other than age the problem of inaccurate and stigmatizing stereotypes disappears this is true even if the motivating factor is correlated with age as pension status typically is
D: holding that a statement of fact relating to the plaintiffs age was not direct evidence of age discrimination because the relevance of the comment is provided by inference
C.