Takeaway: Under U.S. Supreme Court case law, for an employer to obtain summary judgment against an employee’s Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 lawsuit, it must present uncontested evidence and disinterested witness testimony. However, as this case shows, most courts have allowed employers to submit testimony at summary judgment from other employees, even though they are not disinterested, if their testimony is not contradicted by other evidence.

In 1991, the U.S. Department of the Army hired the plaintiff, a woman born in 1958, to serve at the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant (MCAAP) in McAlester, Okla. In 2003, she became an explosives operator (EO) supervisor, also called a grade 6 EO supervisor. Her second-level supervisor, a man born in 1971, was the chief of ammunitions operations at the MCAAP.

In early 2015, two of the plaintiff’s subordinates were accused of sexual harassment, and one was ultimately fired. The MCAAP’s commanding officer directed the chief to reprimand the plaintiff, but he chose not to after discussing the matter with her. The plaintiff filed an equal employment opportunity (EEO) grievance regarding the sexual harassment accusations, disagreeing with the result and asserting that both subordinates should have been fired.

In March 2016, the plaintiff’s first-level supervisor, who was also supervised by the chief, gave her a poor performance rating, which the chief approved. The plaintiff challenged the rating and contacted the MCAAP’s EEO...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMitwFBVV95cUxQY0l4bndpWkRnNDdfODAyTDVS...