Diggs v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, 691 F. App'x 41

Michael J. Diggs, an African-American gas mechanic at Niagara Mohawk, left his jobsite on December 20, 2012 in a company backhoe, drove to his personal garage, and used the backhoe to try to remove a tree stump.
A customer complained and provided photographs showing Diggs operating the backhoe at his home; Niagara Mohawk investigated in two meetings where Diggs initially said he used the backhoe only for transportation and did not disclose using it on his property until confronted with photos.
Niagara Mohawk terminated Diggs for unauthorized personal use of company equipment and for lying during investigatory meetings (violating company standards of conduct).
Diggs pursued and lost a two-day arbitration under the collective bargaining agreement; the neutral arbitrator upheld termination, finding dishonesty at investigatory meetings distinguished Diggs from other employees.
Diggs sued under Title VII alleging racial discrimination; the district court granted summary judgment for Niagara Mohawk, finding no inference of discriminatory intent.
The Second Circuit affirmed, holding Diggs failed to produce the “strong evidence” required to overcome the arbitrator’s adverse finding and to show he was similarly situated to alleged comparators.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Diggs raised a triable Title VII disparate-treatment claim based on termination	Diggs argued he did not lie in investigatory meetings (or alternatively his comparators were equally dishonest), so termination was pretext for racial discrimination	Niagara Mohawk relied on the arbitrator’s finding of dishonesty and that Diggs used equipment personally; argued comparators were not shown to be similarly situated and arbitration decision is highly probative of no discrimination	Affirmed: Diggs failed to present strong evidence that the arbitrator was wrong or that comparators were similarly situated; summary judgment for Niagara Mohawk upheld

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (legal framework for burden-shifting in discrimination cases)
Brown v. City of Syracuse, 673 F.3d 141 (2d Cir. 2012) (elements of prima facie Title VII case)
Holcomb v. Iona Coll., 521 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2008) (prima facie requirements)
Woodman v. WWOR-TV, Inc., 411 F.3d 69 (2d Cir. 2005) (burden-shifting and employer’s production burden)
James v. N.Y. Racing Ass’n, 233 F.3d 149 (2d Cir. 2000) (plaintiff must point to evidence reasonably supporting discrimination after defendant’s nondiscriminatory reason)
Graham v. Long Island R.R., 230 F.3d 34 (2d Cir. 2000) (similarly situated comparator standard)
Shumway v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 118 F.3d 60 (2d Cir. 1997) (definition of "similarly situated")
Collins v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth., 305 F.3d 113 (2d Cir. 2002) (arbitration decision attenuates proof of discriminatory intent; plaintiff must show strong evidence that arbitrator was wrong or proceeding compromised)
Allianz Ins. Co. v. Lerner, 416 F.3d 109 (2d Cir. 2005) (standard of review on summary judgment)
Kerzer v. Kingly Mfg., 156 F.3d 396 (2d Cir. 1998) (speculation insufficient to create triable issue)