Source: cases/29usc623/f-supp-3d-345-590-williams-v-temple-univ-hosp.case
Case source: https://www.neochart.com/catalog/cases/f-supp-3d/volume_345/0590_01/index.html
To demonstrate pretext, Plaintiff needs to point to some direct or circumstantial evidence from which a factfinder could reasonably either (1) disbelieve the employer's articulated legitimate reason or (2) believe that an invidious discriminatory reason was more likely than not a motivating or determinative cause of the employer's action.
Williams' case is far from robust, but Temple asks me to draw far too many inferences adverse to Plaintiff when the prevailing standard requires exactly the opposite.
In all other respects, I deny Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment.
casedsl 1.2 # author: Flash2 (gemini-3.8-flash-high) # triaged-by: Fable (2026-11-10) case /f-supp-3d/345/0590-01 name Williams v. Temple Univ. Hosp., Inc. cite 345 F. Supp. 3d 590 (2018) court United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania date 2018-12-17 url catalog/cases/f-supp-3d/volume_345/0590_01/index.html source ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_345.jsonl sha1=a186b579e0cc71498883a8e82255899d3002a5e9 chars=25467 opinion order : order by McHugh @0..25467 controlling law 29usc623 role applied posture civil; ADEA age discrimination; employer motion for summary judgment denied as to the ADEA/PHRA claims by ED Pa (withdrawn ERISA count dismissed); claim-preclusion argument from unemployment-compensation rulings rejected result claimant-won ? other: result claimant-won records only that the ADEA claim survived summary judgment (every decided block is [triable] or [conceded]); no liability finding element protected-age : satisfied [conceded] route _whole pattern 61-year-old, oldest employee in the department; age element unchallenged fact @1217..1306 [supports] | Plaintiff was 61 years old at the time, the oldest employee in Temple's linen department. element employment-action : satisfied [conceded] route discharge pattern termination at the last step of a progressive-discipline policy fact @1141..1216 [supports] | Defendant Temple terminated Plaintiff Berkley Williams on January 22, 2016. element age-causation : satisfied [triable] route pretext-inference pattern discretionary progressive discipline for cell-phone use, informal warnings available, plus a termination note referring to the employee being close to retirement fact @20102..20201 [supports] | First, Julia admits that there is a large discretionary component to his application of the Policy. fact @21262..21416 [supports] | The evidence consists of a note stating "Term - Jan - on phone - ignored Joe," followed by "Joe thinks he's close to retirement; not sure when retiring"). fact @2901..3041 [cuts-against] | Temple has produced that photograph, and Plaintiff does not dispute that it is indeed an image of him playing video games on his cell phone. fact @21628..21799 [cuts-against] | The record reflects that Julia hired Plaintiff for a role in the linen department when Plaintiff was in his late fifties, which seemingly cuts against a bias based on age, rule @16845..17185 | To demonstrate pretext, Plaintiff needs to point to some direct or circumstantial evidence from which a factfinder could reasonably either (1) disbelieve the employer's articulated legitimate reason or (2) believe that an invidious discriminatory reason was more likely than not a motivating or determinative cause of the employer's action. held @21944..22110 | Williams' case is far from robust, but Temple asks me to draw far too many inferences adverse to Plaintiff when the prevailing standard requires exactly the opposite. held @22181..22251 | In all other respects, I deny Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. gloss The court rejects the argument that the discipline policy was misapplied; the triable issue rests on discretionary, possibly differential, enforcement and the retirement note. The only contested prima facie element was qualification, resolved for the plaintiff on his 28-year tenure.