00-1603 Lalvani v. Cook County, Illinois

Listen to this article

“While no reasonable jury could conclude on this record that Coleman’s decision to terminate Lalvani was motivated by Lalvani’s ethnicity or his having filed a discrimination complaint in 1989, there are other kinds of ’cause’ that are still relevant to a career employee. Here, there is substantial evidence that Coleman was dissatisfied with Lalvani’s performance as an employee. The record reveals numerous run-ins between the two after Coleman became Lalvani’s supervisor in 1991. Over time, Coleman progressively reduced Lalvani’s supervisory duties and assigned him tasks usually reserved for lower ranking social workers. Coleman filed disciplinary charges against Lalvani for 1) failure to follow policies and procedures; 2) delayed discharge planning; 3) poor job performance; and 4) negligence in the performance of duties. These charges were never proven, because Coleman dropped them. Lalvani has evidence that it was Coleman’s (perhaps unsupported) dissatisfaction, rather than the organizational demands created by the County’s belt-tightening, that led Coleman to recommend the elimination of his position. As mentioned earlier, Marcia Saliga, the other Social Worker IV who was terminated during the RIF, testified in detail to a conversation with Coleman on Dec. 10, 1996. According to her affidavit testimony, Coleman apologized for her lay-off and ‘he told me that I was being “laid off because of Lalvani”, and that “he (Mr. Lalvani) was the one that the administration was after.” Mr. Coleman also said that “they (the administration) could not get rid of him (Mr. Lalvani) without getting rid of me, also.”‘ A jury may choose to disbelieve this testimony, but on summary judgment we are not entitled to do so. Based on this testimony and the uncontradicted evidence in the record that Coleman was dissatisfied with Lalvani’s job performance, a reasonable jury could conclude that Coleman used the RIF as pretext for the termination of a career employee without providing Lalvani an opportunity to rebut the allegations of bad performance.”

Affirmed in part, and reversed in part.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Guzman, J., Wood, J.