Direct evidence requires a statement be “made by an individual with authority over the employment decision at issue.” Lawson v. Hinds County School Dist., 2014 WL 373199 *5 (S.D. Miss. Feb. 3, 2014) (Jordan, J.) (citing Krystek v. University of Southern Mississippi, 164 F.3d 251, 256 (5th Cir. 1999)). However, “authority” does not mean
Employment Discrimination
In establishing a prima facie case regarding if a Plaintiff is “qualified” for the position, such qualifications should be construed broadly in favor of the Plaintiff.
By Gregory A. Placzek on
Posted in Employment Discrimination
“Pace’s argument to the district court and throughout the trial was that she had five years of “warehouse experience,” if that undefined term was construed broadly, and that “[s]he was the best qualified.”*5 …In light of the ambiguity in the phrase, the jury considered the employer’s argument that Pace did not have the requisite experience,…
When arguing pretext, an employee should emphasize that their employer refused to give a reason for termination, but subsequently manufactured a laundry list of reasons for their termination.
By Carmen Artaza on
Posted in Employment Discrimination
“We think it significant that, although [decision-maker] refused to give [employee] any reason when he notified her that her contract was not being renewed, during the instant litigation [decision-maker] was able to supply a laundry list of reasons.”
Hague v. Univ. of Tx. Health & Sci. Ctr. at San Antonio, 560 Fed. Appx. 328,…
The 4th prong of a plaintiff’s prima facie case is met when the Plaintiff’s position is eliminated but someone outside the protected class assumes their job duties.
By Adam S. Greenfield on
Posted in Race Discrimination
“Here, the Plaintiff (white male) used an affidavit to assert that ‘defendant transferred his job responsibilities and authorities to … all African –American[s], and none of whom had anywhere near the experience and training.’”
Quinn v. Capital Transp. Corp., 2014 WL 4782708, at *4 (M.D. La. Sep. 24, 2014) (De Gravelles, J.).
Statements indicating spitefulness for reporting discrimination is evidence of pretext because it shows motive.
By Gregory A. Placzek on
Posted in Race Discrimination, Retaliation
“[Plaintiff] claims that the Disciplinary Warning was issued in retaliation for his reporting of Cooper’s racially hostile statements. [Defendant] asserts that the warning issued because Willis demonstrated a ‘lack of good judgment’ and a ‘lack of respect for others’ when he sent the mass email disclosing that his co-worker son overdosed on pills. But [Plaintiff]…
Reassignment from a DEA task force to the jail even without a decrease in pay is a sufficient adverse action to defeat motion to dismiss.
By Carmen Artaza on
Posted in Employment Discrimination
“This Court has previously held that transfers to jail duty, even without a decrease in pay, can be adverse employment decisions because jobs in the jail are not as interesting or prestigious as jobs in the law enforcement section. We made that finding only after reviewing the evidence presented at trial, and thus we can…
Success is the most critical “Johnson” factor for a prevailing plaintiff when a Judge adjusts the lodestar amount, but success is not measured solely on the recovery of monetary damages.
By Adam S. Greenfield on
Posted in Sexual Harassment
“[A] lawsuit spawning some remedial measures to prevent a [civil rights violation “recurrence” is considered success when adjusting the lodestar. Here, the employer “distributing an employment manual to its employees containing its sexual harassment policy and … the company now [having] discussions with management to prevent sexual harassment” is considered success. Damages recovered in this…
Plaintiff may establish the employer’s concealed motives by showing the supervisor’s ability to take tangible employment action against Plaintiff.
By Kalandra N. Wheeler on
Posted in Employment Discrimination
“Although [Plaintiff] … is unaware of who actually made the decision to hire or fire her…, it undoubtedly was [Coworker]’s recommendation that [Plaintiff] be reprimanded for insubordination that initiated the termination process. Moreover,…testimony indicates that [Coworker] was involved in [Plaintiff’s] hiring to some degree, and…testimony tends to indicate that [Coworker] may have input regarding the…
The statement that a black employee was selected for job elimination because it is easier for a black employee to find a job is direct evidence of discrimination.
By Robert J. Wiley on
Posted in Race Discrimination
“In Krystek v. University of Southern Mississippi, the Fifth Circuit explained that workplace comments provide sufficient evidence of discrimination if they are ‘1) related [to the protected class of persons of which the plaintiff is a member]; 2) proximate in time to the terminations; 3) made by an individual with authority over the employment…
Where employer relies on cases based on Rule 12(b)(6) and not the summary judgment standard, the precedent will not be considered.
By CRANSOM on
Posted in Employment Discrimination
“The Court notes that every case relied upon for Defendant’s substantive arguments was decided under the summary judgment standard, not under Rule 12(b)(6).”
Mosley v. Tutle & Tutle Trucking, Inc., CA No. 6:13-CD-468, 2013 WL 6824385 at *2 (E.D. Tex., Dec. 26, 2013) (Davis, J.).