“There is no dispute that Lewis was Wood’s direct supervisor and was responsible for Wood’s performance evaluations and implementation of disciplinary actions…. Woods pay and any raises were merit-based and dependent on performance reviews done by Lewis. There is additional evidence … that Lewis had refused to communicate with Wood and had removed some of his duties as a result of the feud. All of this indicates that Lewis had influence or leverage over Wood’s decisionmaking.”
E.E.O.C. v. DynMcDermott Petroleum Ops. Co., 537 Fed. Appx. 437, 444 (5th Cir. July 26, 2013) (Davis, Graves, and Higginson, JJ.).