Williams v. Temple Univ. Hosp., Inc.

Facts

1. 2 Age forty or older satisfied conceded

   Plaintiff was 61 years old at the time, the oldest employee in Temple's linen department.

2. 3 Hiring discharge or employment terms satisfied conceded

   Defendant Temple terminated Plaintiff Berkley Williams on January 22, 2016.

3. 4 Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment satisfied triable

   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.

4. 4 Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment satisfied triable

   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.

5. 4 Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment satisfied triable

   First, Julia admits that there is a large discretionary component to his application of the Policy.

6. 4 Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment satisfied triable

   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").

7. 4 Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment satisfied triable

   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,

8. 4 Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment satisfied triable

   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.

9. 4 Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment satisfied triable

   In all other respects, I deny Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment.