Employment – discrimination — retaliation

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Civil

Employment – discrimination — retaliation

Even though an employee told her psychiatrist she was thinking about killing her supervisor, summary judgment for the employer on her discrimination and retaliation claims was improper.

“[W]e reiterate here that the similarly-situated inquiry is flexible, common-sense, and factual. It asks ‘essentially, are there enough common features between the individuals to allow a meaningful comparison?’ Humphries v. CBOCS West, Inc., 474 F.3d 387, 405 (7th Cir. 2007), aff’d, 553 U.S. 442 (2008). There must be ‘sufficient commonalities on the key variables between the plaintiff and the would-be comparator to allow the type of comparison that, taken together with the other prima facie evidence, would allow a jury to reach an inference of discrimination.’ Id. In other words, the proposed comparator must be similar enough to permit a reasonable juror to infer, in light of all the circumstances, that an impermissible animus motivated the employer’s decision. Here, Coleman’s two white, male co-workers were disciplined by the same decision-maker, subject to the same code of conduct, and disciplined more leniently for violating the same rule as she. Their case is close enough to Coleman’s to provide a ‘meaningful comparison’ and to permit a reasonable jury to infer discrimination. Id.”

Reversed.

10-3694 Coleman v. Donahoe

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Coar, J., Hamilton, J.