Packer v. Trustees of Indiana University School of Medicine
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15223
| 7th Cir. | 2015Background
- Dr. Subah Packer, a tenured associate professor at Indiana University School of Medicine, was terminated in 2013 for allegedly persistent unsatisfactory research performance (publications and external funding).
- Packer alleged sex discrimination (Title VII), retaliation (Title VII), pay discrimination (Equal Pay Act), and breach of contract, claiming Dean Brater and Dept. Chair Sturek sought her removal and undermined her research.
- The University relied on multiple years of unsatisfactory performance ratings, a performance-improvement plan, and a Conduct Characterization Committee recommendation supporting dismissal for serious misconduct.
- At summary judgment the district court granted the University’s motion, finding Packer’s opposition memorandum failed to support her claims with specific citations to admissible record evidence and in many places ignored required elements of claims.
- On appeal the Seventh Circuit reviewed de novo but limited its consideration to the evidence and arguments actually presented to the district court; it refused to entertain newly developed factual presentation by Packer’s appellate counsel.
- The Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding Packer forfeited or waived most claims by failing to comply with Rule 56 and local summary-judgment rules and by offering inadequate evidentiary support for each claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Title VII — Disparate treatment (pay and discharge) | Brater and Sturek treated Packer worse than male colleagues and engineered her removal because of sex | Actions were based on legitimate, gender-neutral performance-based reasons (unsatisfactory research, failure to meet grant/publication expectations) | Affirmed summary judgment for University — Packer failed to cite specific admissible evidence to create a triable issue on discrimination or pretext |
| Title VII — Retaliation | Packer was retaliated against after internal/EEOC complaints (denied raises, reduced lab space, salary cut) | Adverse actions were performance-based and not causally linked to protected complaints; plaintiff offered no competent record evidence of causation | Affirmed — Packer’s cursory analysis and lack of record citations waived/forfeited the claim |
| Equal Pay Act | Packer was paid less than similarly situated male faculty because of sex | Pay differences were justified by legitimate factors; plaintiff failed to identify proper comparators or support prima facie case | Affirmed — plaintiff omitted prima facie analysis and supporting citations, waiving the claim |
| Breach of Contract (tenure) | Tenure created contractual rights and University breached by bad-faith campaign to remove her | Handbooks/policies relied on disclaim creation of enforceable rights; plaintiff failed to cite letters or contractual terms in the record | Affirmed — plaintiff did not present record evidence showing contractual rights; claim unsupported |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment requires non-movant to identify admissible evidence establishing genuine dispute)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (framework for indirect proof of discrimination)
- Waldridge v. American Hoechst Corp., 24 F.3d 918 (Seventh Circuit on non-movant’s obligation to identify specific record evidence opposing summary judgment)
- Milligan v. Board of Trustees of Southern Illinois University, 686 F.3d 378 (party cannot raise new reasons on appeal for opposing summary judgment)
- Puffer v. Allstate Ins. Co., 675 F.3d 709 (failure to develop argument at summary judgment can constitute waiver)