904 F.3d 377
5th Cir.2018Background
- Angela Roberson-King, an African-American rehabilitation counselor at Louisiana Rehabilitation Services (LRS), applied in 2014 for a district supervisor promotion but was not selected.
- The promoted candidate, Mara Lott Patten, is white and held a Certified Rehabilitation Counselor (CRC) credential that Roberson-King did not have.
- Roberson-King sued under Title VII for race discrimination and asserted state-law tort claims (La. Civ. Code art. 2315 and intentional infliction of emotional distress); the IIED claim was abandoned.
- The district court dismissed the Article 2315 claim and granted summary judgment to LRS on the Title VII claim; Roberson-King appealed.
- The Fifth Circuit addressed whether Article 2315 can be used for employment-discrimination claims instead of the Louisiana Employment Discrimination Law (LEDL), and whether LRS’s proffered non-discriminatory reason (Patten’s CRC credential) was pretextual.
- The Fifth Circuit affirmed: Article 2315 is displaced by the LEDL for discrimination claims, and Roberson-King failed to raise a genuine issue of pretext under McDonnell Douglas.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Viability of Article 2315 claim for employment discrimination | Roberson-King argued LRS breached statutory duties (Title VII) so Article 2315 supports a state tort claim | LRS argued employment-discrimination claims must proceed under the LEDL, which includes specific procedures and remedies | Dismissed: LEDL is the specific statutory scheme and displaces Article 2315 for employment-discrimination claims |
| Title VII burden-shifting framework | Roberson-King showed prima facie discrimination and argued she was better qualified, implying pretext | LRS proffered legitimate, non-discriminatory reason: Patten’s CRC credential made her more competitive | Summary judgment for LRS: plaintiff failed to show she was clearly better qualified or that LRS’s reason was pretextual |
| Whether differences in qualifications created a genuine issue of material fact | Roberson-King pointed to longer tenure, more graduate credit, leadership academy attendance, and better production records | LRS noted both candidates exceeded minimums and emphasized Patten’s CRC and relevant LRS supervisory experience | Held: Differences were not sufficient; employers may reasonably prefer one candidate’s credentials over another’s |
| Significance of appointing authority’s attempt to rescind promotion after grievance | Roberson-King argued the rescission attempt shows pretext or improper motive | LRS/record showed the rescission attempt was to review allegations, not evidence of discrimination | Held: Attempt to rescind, without evidence of discriminatory findings, does not establish pretext |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (established burden-shifting framework for circumstantial Title VII cases)
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc., 530 U.S. 133 (explains employer’s burden of production is not an assessment of credibility)
- Moss v. BMC Software, Inc., 610 F.3d 917 (Fifth Circuit on summary judgment review and McDonnell Douglas application)
- LeMaire v. La. Dep’t of Transp. & Dev., 480 F.3d 383 (court should not second-guess employer business decisions in assessing pretext)
- Deines v. Tex. Dep’t of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 164 F.3d 277 (standard for "clearly better qualified")
- Laxton v. Gap Inc., 333 F.3d 572 (plaintiff may show pretext by proving employer’s explanation false)
- EEOC v. La. Office of Cmty. Servs., 47 F.3d 1438 (qualification-comparison and pretext guidance)
- Kennedy v. Kennedy, 699 So. 2d 351 (La. 1996) (when statutes conflict, specific statutory scheme prevails over more general law)
- Guillory v. St. Landry Par. Police Jury, 802 F.2d 822 (discussed in dicta regarding Article 2315 but did not resolve conflict with specific statutory schemes)