Thursday, October 10, 2013
Ind. Decisions - 7th Circuit decides one Indiana case today, a reversal
In John Mullin, II v. Temco Machinery, Incorporated (SD Ind., Pratt), a 16-page opinion, Judge Flaum writes:
John Mullin, II, brought suit alleging that he was fired because of his age, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. He was an employee with an allegedly less than sterling performance as a follower of corporate policy. He was also the oldest—and most profitable— salesman for a company that sells fire trucks and other rescue equipment, Temco Machinery, Inc. After Temco fired the fifty‐six year old Mullin, it quickly hired two inexperienced salesmen in their twenties. Mullin brought suit, and the district court granted summary judgment to Temco. For the following reasons, we reverse and remand. * * *
Standing alone, none of these incidents, events, or alleged justifications would likely suffice for Mullin to survive summary judgment. In combination, however, they point to a string of questionable conduct, from the suspicious timing of personnel decisions to ambiguous statements about age to multiple seemingly inaccurate allegations. Mullin genuinely contests all of Temco’s accusations. He has put forth sufficient evidence that the jury should resolve the many material factual questions, as well as the credibility issues underlying them. Of course, we express no view on the ultimate merit of Mullin’s claims. When, as here, the “facts are susceptible to two interpretations,” the Supreme Court has cautioned against granting summary judgment “too readily.” Filar, 526 F.3d at 1066 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
III. Conclusion. For the foregoing reasons, we REVERSE and REMAND.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on October 10, 2013 07:11 PM
Posted to Ind. (7th Cir.) Decisions