“Leissner stated that McMann’s prior offenses and failure to secure the trash trailer would not justify his termination….  He also points to the deposition of Katya Watson, the regional property manager, who stated that McMann’s failure to secure the cart and prior offenses were not grounds for termination….  Accordingly, McMann has raised a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Greystar’s proffered reason for terminated was pretextual.”

McMann v. Greystar Management Services, LP, CA No. 1:12-CV-909, 2013 WL 6243847 at *6 (W.D. Tex. Dec. 2, 2013) (Austin, J.).

“Further, the question is not what Greystar thought when it returned McMann to work, but what it (and its managers) believed when, three months later, they forced McMann to resign.”

McMann v. Greystar Management Services, LP, CA No. 1:12-CV-909, 2013 WL 6243847 at *5 (W.D. Tex. Dec. 2, 2013) (Austin, J.).

“[Defendant] does not appear to have formal written procedures in place for handling disciplinary matters, and there is no indication that [Plaintiff] was in fact informed that her work was subpar prior to the termination of her employment….  The Court finds that there are contested issues of material fact regarding the reason for [Plaintiff]’s termination and its legitimacy.”

Bourgeois v. Matrana’s Produce, 2013 WL 4525652 at *6 (E.D. La. August 30, 2013) (Roby, J.).

“Leissner’s alleged warning to McMann not to die in someone’s apartment, may enable a reasonable jury to find that Leissner regarded McMann as having an impairment, namely heart disease, which substantially limits him in the major life activity of working.”

McMann v. Greystar Management Services, LP, CA No. 1:12-CV-909, 2013 WL 6243847 at *5 (W.D. Tex. Dec. 2, 2013) (Austin, J.).

“Contravening the heavy weight of this inference is the fact that the text messages at some point changed, indicating [Plaintiff]’s strong desire that [harasser] stop contacting her.  This suggests that [harasser]’s overtures were later uninvited.”

Bourgeois v. Matrana’s Produce, 2013 WL 4525652 at *6 (E.D. La. August 30, 2013) (Roby, J.).

“[A]fter the Plaintiff was hired and before she was fired, Wade made an allegation of race discrimination.  Abadilla (age 61 at the time Plaintiff was discharged) was herself implicated in the Wade situation…. [T]hese changed circumstances, primarily Wade’s allegation of race discrimination, render the ‘same actor’ inference inapplicable.”

Bautista v. Quest Diagnostics Clinical Laboratories, Inc., 2013 WL 4647677 at *7 (S.D. Tex. August 30, 2013) (Atlas, J.).

“McMann asserts that he resigned even though he did not want to because he felt compelled to do so…. Additionally, in a sworn statement, Gregg Williams states that Leissner told him the missing trash cart had been the reason for McMann’s termination…. The factual dispute[s] … are enough to demonstrate a genuine dispute of material fact.”

McMann v. Greystar Management Services, LP, CA No. 1:12-CV-909, 2013 WL 6243847 at *4 (W.D. Tex. Dec. 2, 2013) (Austin, J.).

“[B]ecause there were a number of individuals involved in the decision to terminate Plaintiff’s employment, some of whom were not involved in the decision to hire her, the ‘same actor’ inference is inapplicable.”

Bautista v. Quest Diagnostics Clinical Laboratories, Inc., 2013 WL 4647677 at *6 (S.D. Tex. August 30, 2013) (Atlas, J.).

“Plaintiff testified that because she was provided no assurances about how no contact with [the harasser] was going to be enforced and [the harasser] was not disciplined in any manner, she had no choice but to accept the transfer.  A genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether the employer exercised reasonable care to correct promptly any sexually-harassing behavior.”

Sanders v. Christus Santa Rosa PASC, 13-CV-250, 2014 WL 201071 at *6 (W.D. Tex. January 17, 2014) (Rodriguez, J.).

 

“[Employee] told Plaintiff that she would be okay financially because she was old enough to receive Social Security benefits … [and] that training Plaintiff was ‘not a priority’ and that she and [Employee] were ‘old ladies’ who were ‘slow to make decisions’ … [T]he statements are evidence that, combined with other evidence discussed above, raises a genuine issue of material fact.”

Bautista v. Quest Diagnostics Clinical Laboratories, Inc., 2013 WL 4647677 at *6 (S.D. Tex. August 30, 2013) (Atlas, J.).