A dean’s and provost’s internal deliberations about a professor’s retirement plans and resistance to technology after not renewing her contract were not “direct evidence” of age discrimination, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held.
The court affirmed the Western District of Virginia’s grant of summary judgment for the university on the plaintiff’s Age Discrimination in Employment Act, or ADEA claim.
“Stated succinctly, [the plaintiff] has failed to demonstrate that age was the but-for cause of her 2018 nonrenewal,” U.S. Circuit Judge Robert B. King wrote. “[The plaintiff] was not meeting [the university’s] legitimate expectations at the time of her nonrenewal, in that she repeatedly failed to develop a digital art skillset.”
Senior Circuit Judge Diana Gribbon Motz and Judge Julius N. Richardson authored concurring opinions.
The opinion is Palmer v. Liberty University Inc. (VLW 023-2-171).
‘Could she do it?’
Richmond litigator Richard F. Hawkins III told Lawyers Weekly that he has moved the 4th Circuit for reconsideration and is prepared to take Palmer’s case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
He said there are two “big issues” with Liberty’s legitimate expectation argument.
“A year or two before she was let go, they asked Palmer to teach online courses; she declined and they never asked again,” he said. “The bigger question was ‘could she do it?’ She wasn’t proficient yet but they didn’t require that of everybody and she was never told that her job was on the line....
The election campaign committee for Joo Kwangdeok, the People Power Party candidate for Mayor of Namyangju, asserted on the 27th that the Democratic Party candidate Choi Hyundeok's claim regarding ...