Suriya H. Smiley v. Columbia College Chicago
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 8685
| 7th Cir. | 2013Background
- Smiley, a Palestinian/Lebanese part-time instructor in Columbia College Chicago's Radio Department, is accused of discriminatory remarks in class after a student complaint in fall 2008.
- Student alleged Smiley made anti-Semitic statements; complaint outlined incidents from September to November 2008.
- Columbia adopted an Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Policy in August 2008; investigations of student complaints are handled by the Dean of Students' Office.
- Downs conducted interviews with the student and Smiley and prepared a summary finding a policy violation; Love, as Vice-President for Academic Affairs, reviewed and ultimately concluded Smiley violated the Policy.
- Smiley was informed she would no longer be asked to teach classes; she filed suit alleging race/national-origin discrimination under Title VII and §1981.
- The district court granted summary judgment for Columbia, and Smiley appeals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prima facie case and pretext | Smiley was treated less favorably because of race/national origin. | Smiley failed to show Columbia's reason was pretext or that she met legitimate job expectations. | Smiley failed to show pretext; summary judgment upheld. |
| Investigation procedures and pretext | Columbia's investigation was deficient and biased, suggesting pretext. | Investigations followed policy; no evidence of selective treatment. | Investigations did not show pretext; summary judgment proper. |
Key Cases Cited
- Humphries v. CBOCS West, Inc., 474 F.3d 387 (7th Cir. 2007) (applies indirect-method framework for Title VII/§1981)
- Forrester v. Rauland-Borg Corp., 453 F.3d 416 (7th Cir. 2006) (pretext analysis focuses on true ground for action)
- Stockwell v. City of Harvey, 597 F.3d 895 (7th Cir. 2010) (pretext inquiry when legitimate reason is disputed)
- Chaney v. Plainfield Healthcare Center, 612 F.3d 908 (7th Cir. 2010) (investigation adequacy informs pretext analysis)
- Matthews v. City of East St. Louis, 675 F.3d 703 (7th Cir. 2012) (summary judgment de novo, review of facts in Smiley's favor)
- O'Leary v. Accretive Health, Inc., 657 F.3d 625 (7th Cir. 2011) (same standard for Title VII and §1981 discrimination)
- Article II Gun Shop, Inc. v. Gonzales, 441 F.3d 492 (7th Cir. 2006) (admissibility of declarations in summary judgment)