A few lessons from a race discrimination case involving termination of an attorney

Today Law.com linked to an article about the 11th Circuit’s prompt disposition — in the employer’s favor — of a case involving termination of a black female in-house attorney .

According to this article, the Court of Appeals affirmed the grant of summary judgment “on the basis of the thorough and well-reasoned discussion of the issues” by the District Court.

I did not look for the District Court opinion, but only read the article. Nonetheless, a few observations came to mind.

First, the Corporation’s General Counsel hired the plaintiff “in 1998 as he spearheaded a campaign to make corporate legal departments more racially diverse.” The same man fired her in 2000.

Lesson: Many courts have found persuasive the argument that when the person who fired a discrimination plaintiff is the same person who hired him or her, there can be no discrimination because had that person been prejudiced racially (or on other protected grounds) they would not have hired the plaintiff.

Second, the stated reason for termination was that the plaintiff did not “provide good client service, didn’t take responsibility for her actions, and didn’t meet BellSouth’s standards for earning clients’ acceptance, trust and respect. “

On the other hand, she hardly appears to be a complete failure as an attorney. She had previously “worked for New York’s Hughes Hubbard & Reed, represented IBM and worked for the U.S. attorney’s office in the Southern District of Florida.” After the disputed termination, she joined the Miami firm Coffey & Wright, where her profile is quite impressive.

However, the article gives a specific example of her aggravation of clients. Presumably the evidence included more such incidents.

Lesson: Termination of an employee who in many respects is quite competent and performs many job functions well may be quite defensible, based on substantial evidence of problems with particular aspects of performance. For example, where an employee is undeniably very knowledgeable and technically competent, but fails as a manager due to poor interpersonal skills, inability to control anger, etc.

[Caveat: I don't know what the summary judgment evidence or analysis was on these points; just thought the article presented a "teaching moment" based on my speculation]

Fulton County Daily Report (via law.com): “11th Circuit Turns Back BellSouth Attorney’s Discrimination Claims” by Scott Simonson

Sphere: Related Content