Wymes v. Knight, 5:21-cv-01268-JRA

Shirley Wymes, an African American, was hired by Koch Knight as a Production Operator on August 13, 2018 and reported to Operations Manager Timothy Faciana; she was terminated February 18, 2021.
In August 2019 a coworker (Pedro Mejia) started a rumor about Wymes; she reported it, Mejia was investigated and disciplined, and Wymes did not contend the rumor was race-based.
Multiple coworkers reported unprofessional conduct by Wymes (name-calling, leaving workspace, not following safety rules); HR provided coaching in Sept–Oct 2019.
Wymes received a one-day suspension on June 29, 2020 for safety violations after being sent home for not wearing steel-toed shoes and related conduct.
October 2020: verbal altercation with a female coworker; both sent home and HR investigated; Wymes did not report race-based comments during the investigation.
February 9, 2021: coworker Tim Bramlett reported Wymes threw saddle shrapnel that could hit him; Faciana investigated, found the report credible, and terminated Wymes on Feb 18, 2021 citing prior counseling for safety and disrespect. Wymes filed an EEOC charge and sued alleging disparate impact, hostile work environment, and retaliation; the court denied a strike motion but granted summary judgment for defendant on all claims.

Issue	Wymes' Argument	Koch Knight's Argument	Held
Disparate impact (race)	Wymes alleged Defendant's conduct had an adverse/disproportionate impact (but later abandoned the claim in briefing).	No specific employment practice was identified; no evidence of group-wide disparate impact.	Summary judgment for Defendant — claim abandoned/fails as a matter of law.
Hostile work environment (race)	Rumor and repeated incidents created a racially hostile workplace; complaint alleged racial slurs.	Incidents were not shown to be race-based; employer investigated and took corrective action; conduct not severe or pervasive.	Summary judgment for Defendant — no evidence harassment was race-based or sufficiently severe/pervasive; employer acted.
Retaliation (reporting race discrimination)	Wymes says she engaged in protected activity by reporting harassment and was fired in retaliation shortly after.	Wymes did not engage in protected activity because reported incidents were not race-related; termination was for legitimate nonretaliatory reasons (safety/misconduct); no pretext shown.	Summary judgment for Defendant — no protected activity or causal/pretextual link shown.

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (summary judgment standard on materiality and burden).
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (moving party need not produce evidence but can show nonmoving party lacks proof of an essential element).
White v. Turfway Park Racing Ass'n, Inc., 909 F.2d 941 (6th Cir. 1990) (evidence should be viewed in light most favorable to nonmoving party).
France v. Lucas, 836 F.3d 612 (6th Cir. 2016) (party may not create factual issue by affidavit that contradicts earlier deposition testimony).
Michael v. Caterpillar Fin. Servs. Corp., 496 F.3d 584 (6th Cir. 2007) (elements for a hostile work environment claim).
Shollenbarger v. Planes Moving & Storage, [citation="297 F. App'x 483"] (6th Cir. 2008) (elements for disparate impact claim).
Tucker v. Union of Needletrades, Industrial and Textile Employees, 407 F.3d 784 (6th Cir. 2005) (plaintiff may not amend complaint via opposition brief).