Noris Rogers v. Pearland Indep School District
827 F.3d 403
| 5th Cir. | 2016Background
- Noris Rogers, an African-American applicant, applied twice in 2011 for a master electrician position with Pearland ISD; first application omitted disclosure of prior felony convictions, second application disclosed them.
- After the first application, a background check revealed prior felony convictions; Rogers met with HR, became angry, and was asked to leave; he did not satisfactorily explain the omission.
- The District hired an African-American (Rodney Taylor) after the first vacancy and later another African-American after Taylor left; Rogers was told his initial lack of candor and the seriousness of his record made him ineligible.
- Rogers sued under Title VII alleging race discrimination, advancing both disparate impact and disparate treatment theories in the district court.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the School District, finding Rogers failed to make a prima facie case under either theory; on appeal Rogers abandoned disparate impact and challenged the disparate treatment ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rogers preserved/challenged the district court's denial of motion to strike evidence | Rogers argued documents contained discrepancies warranting exclusion | School District argued discrepancies do not render evidence inadmissible | Court: No reversible error; district court acted within discretion — denial stands |
| Whether Rogers preserved/argued disparate impact on appeal | Rogers listed disparate impact below but provided no developed argument | School District urged claim was abandoned on appeal | Court: Abandoned on appeal; even if considered, plaintiff failed to show a facially neutral policy with disparate impact |
| Whether Rogers established prima facie disparate treatment under McDonnell Douglas | Rogers pointed to comparator Russell Alvis (white) who allegedly failed to disclose conviction but was hired, arguing disparate treatment | School District said comparators not similarly situated; emphasized consideration of seriousness of convictions and applicant candor | Court: Rogers failed prima facie because comparator not “nearly identical”; Alvis’s record materially differed in seriousness and circumstances |
| Whether Rogers raised pattern-or-practice theory | Rogers referenced pattern-or-practice at summary judgment (but did not pursue in district court) | School District: not raised and cannot be used in a private, non-class action | Court: Not considered; pattern-or-practice unavailable absent class action/certification |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (establishes three-step burden-shifting framework for discrimination claims)
- Tex. Dep’t of Cmty. Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248 (clarifies employer’s burden to articulate legitimate nondiscriminatory reason)
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc., 530 U.S. 133 (plaintiff may show pretext or that discrimination was a motivating factor)
- Lee v. Kansas City S. Ry. Co., 574 F.3d 253 (5th Cir.) (“nearly identical circumstances” standard for comparators)
- Perez v. Tex. Dep’t of Criminal Justice, 395 F.3d 206 (5th Cir.) (comparability analysis focuses on the conduct provoking the adverse action)