01-2853 Franzoni v. Hartmarx Corp.

Listen to this article

“[E]ven if we were to assume that Franzoni had set forth a prima facie case, his claim would fail because he has failed to demonstrate pretext. We have previously noted that pretext requires more than a showing that the business decision was ‘mistaken, ill considered or foolish,’ and have held that so long as the employer ‘honestly believed’ the reason given for the action, pretext has not been shown. Jordan v. Summers, 205 F.3d 337, 343 (7th Cir. 2000); see also O’Conner v. DePaul Univ., 123 F.3d 665, 671 (7th Cir. 1997) (‘On the issue of pretext, our only concern is the honesty of the employer’s explanation …’). HSM’s stated reason for terminating Franzoni was that Franzoni misrepresented his medical condition. Robinson knew that Franzoni was not showing up for work, and based on the videotape, he concluded that Franzoni was misrepresenting his medical condition. Although Franzoni vigorously disputes the circumstances surrounding his medical leave and that he misrepresented his medical condition, he does not address the relevant question- whether Robinson ‘honestly believed’ that Franzoni was misrepresenting his medical condition. See Jordan, 205 F.3d at 343; see also Roberts v. Separators, Inc., 172 F.3d 448, 453 (7th Cir. 1999) (‘Where an employer has honestly described the motivation for its decision, that decision is not pretext for discrimination just because the plaintiff asserts the defendant’s beliefs were inaccurate.’). Franzoni failed to present any evidence that Robinson did not ‘honestly believe’ he was justified in terminating Franzoni for such reasons, and therefore, Franzoni’s age discrimination claim fails.”

Affirmed.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Leinenweber, J., Kanne, J.