867 F.3d 814
7th Cir.2017Background
- Clayton Owens, age 61, was maintenance supervisor at a Chicago public high school and had an earlier age-discrimination suit against the Board.
- In Jan. and May 2013, Owens says supervisor Martine Miller was told about the suit and twice threatened to "get rid of" anyone who sued the school system.
- In June 2013 Miller gave Owens an "unsatisfactory" performance rating (his worst), and commented, "I told you you weren’t going to get away with that."
- Later that year the Board laid off maintenance workers for budgetary reasons; Owens’s unsatisfactory rating made him the first laid off and he took early retirement, claiming constructive discharge.
- Owens sued alleging age discrimination and retaliation under the ADEA; the district court granted summary judgment for the Board on both claims.
- The Seventh Circuit affirmed dismissal of the age-discrimination claim but reversed as to retaliation, holding summary judgment inappropriate because a jury could credit Owens’s account that Miller’s threats caused the adverse rating and layoff.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination (ADEA) | Owens: rating and layoff were motivated by age and prior suit filed about age discrimination | Board/Miller: documented poor performance justified rating; other older employees not similarly rated | Court: Affirmed dismissal — employer offered legitimate reasons and plaintiff failed to show pretext for age-based motive |
| Retaliation (ADEA § 623(d)) | Owens: Miller threatened reprisals for suing and then used the unsatisfactory rating to effect those reprisals; statements support retaliation claim | Miller: denies knowledge of suit or making threats; says rating aimed to begin performance improvement, not to cause layoff | Court: Reversed dismissal — factual dispute over whether threats caused rating; jury must decide credibility and causation |
Key Cases Cited
- St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502 (legitimate employer reason defeats discrimination claim unless plaintiff shows the reason is pretextual)
- Ortiz v. Werner Enterprises, 834 F.3d 760 (discussing standards for resolving employment-discrimination claims)