01-1361 Bennington v. Caterpillar, Inc.

Listen to this article

“In cases where the age difference between the plaintiff and the individual treated more favorably is less than ten years, ‘the plaintiff still may present a triable claim if [he] directs the court to evidence that [his] employer considered [his] age to be significant.’ Id. Bennington has not presented any evidence that Caterpillar’s decisions affecting his employment were motivated by his age. Even assuming, as we must, that the Special Projects Unit to which Bennington and other managers were assigned had been derisively referred to as ‘waste management’ by Caterpillar higher-ups, or that Bennington’s review was changed improperly, such comments or actions do not (without more facts) evidence hostility on the basis of age. The insubstantial difference in age between Bennington and Lubbers and the absence of discriminatory animus by Caterpillar supports the district court’s grant of summary judgment on this claim.”

Affirmed.

01-1361 Bennington v. Caterpillar, Inc.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, McDade, J., Flaum, J.