Hernandez v. Yellow Transportation, Inc., 670 F.3d 644

Plaintiffs Hernandez, Ketterer, and Trevino worked at Yellow Transportation's Dallas terminal and alleged race discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and Texas law.
Yellow moved for summary judgment; the district court granted judgment for Yellow on all claims asserted by these plaintiffs and certified a final judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b).
The district court limited consideration to admissible evidence and to evidence cited in the summary judgment briefing; it rejected much of the plaintiffs’ harassment evidence as not personally experienced or not based on race.
Hernandez (Hispanic) and Trevino (Hispanic) claimed hostile environment based on race and non-race harassment; Trevino alleged race-based harassment and observed incidents; Hernandez also alleged a discriminatory termination following an altercation with a coworker.
Ketterer (Caucasian) claimed race-based hostile environment through association with minority coworkers and retaliation for protected activity (picketing).
On appeal, the Fifth Circuit reviewed de novo whether material facts precluded summary judgment and affirmed the district court’s rulings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Hernandez and Trevino hostile environment viability	Harassment against Hispanics and others created hostile environment.	Insufficient frequency/severity; not race-based, and not personally experienced by Hernandez/Trevino.	Affirmed summary judgment; evidence not enough to show race-based, severe/pervasive environment.
Ketterer hostile environment via association	Association with minority employees supports hostile environment claim.	No proof of a personal, racially-based association; claim not preserved for review.	Affirmed summary judgment; no cognizable association-based harassment under Title VII here.
Ketterer retaliation – adverse action and causation	Post-picketing actions and other conduct were retaliatory.	No cognizable adverse actions tied to protected activity; violations of policy justified actions.	Affirmed summary judgment; no but-for causation established.
Hernandez discrimination and retaliation	Pretext evidence shows termination was racially motivated and/or retaliatory.	Discipline for policy violation; pretext evidence insufficient; similarly situated and procedural concerns do not prove pretext.	Affirmed summary judgment on both discrimination and retaliation claims.

Ramsey v. Henderson, 286 F.3d 264 (5th Cir. 2002) (standard for hostile work environment elements)
Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (S. Ct. 1998) (objective/subjective hostility required)
Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc., 530 U.S. 133 (S. Ct. 2000) (pretext framework against legitimate reasons)
Septimus v. Univ. of Houston, 399 F.3d 601 (5th Cir. 2005) (evidence of harassment toward others may be limited relevance)
Waltman v. Int'l Paper Co., 875 F.2d 468 (5th Cir. 1989) (atmosphere harassment may support Title VII claim)
Kelly v. Boeing Petroleum Servs., Inc., 61 F.3d 350 (5th Cir. 1995) (cross-category discrimination evidence can be relevant)
Lee v. Kan. City S. Ry. Co., 574 F.3d 253 (5th Cir. 2009) (identical conduct; comparable violation histories required)
Long v. Eastfield Coll., 88 F.3d 300 (5th Cir. 1996) (bears on causation burden in retaliation cases)
Strong v. Univ. Healthcare Sys., L.L.C., 482 F.3d 802 (5th Cir. 2007) (temporal proximity alone insufficient for but-for causation)