Rivera-Rivera v. Medina & Medina, Inc. — 898 F.3d 77 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018

United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018-08-01

29usc623: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)

Original case on neochart.com

Case and law context

29 U.S.C. §§ 621–634

Role: applied; posture: civil; ADEA hostile work environment and retaliation; summary judgment for employer reversed as to both ADEA claims by CA1 (Title VII wage and gender claims affirmed); result: claimant-won; claim:

Uncertainty

other: result is claimant-won as to the ADEA claims actually litigated (age hostile environment, retaliation); the court deemed an ADEA wage-disparity theory waived in a footnote, and the affirmed parts of the judgment are Title VII claims

Misfit

None recorded

B · Case × element grid

Top-level elements follow claim order in panels of up to six elements. Case rows repeat across panels. Every recorded block retains its holding and basis; multiple blocks are not merged into a case-level verdict. ✓ satisfied · ✗ not satisfied · ○ not reached · · not addressed. Muted blocks are not counted. Sub-element evidence remains on case and element pages.

Elements 1–6 of 31

29 U.S.C. §§ 621–634
CaseEmployer coverage and exclusionsAge forty or olderHiring discharge or employment termsJudicial but-for standard for age-based treatmentRoute-conditioned statutory f(1) and f(2) alternativesConditional state firefighter and law-enforcement hiring or retirement
Rivera-Rivera v. Medina & Medina, Inc. — 898 F.3d 77 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018 (29usc623: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md))· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed

Elements 7–12 of 31

29 U.S.C. §§ 621–634
CaseAge sixty-five executive or high-policymaker compulsory retirementJudicial impact requirement to identify a particular practiceJudicial impact requirement of significant causal disparityCovered employment agencyCovered labor organizationOpposition or participation
Rivera-Rivera v. Medina & Medina, Inc. — 898 F.3d 77 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018 (29usc623: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md))· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed

Elements 13–18 of 31

29 U.S.C. §§ 621–634
CaseJudicial material-adversity standard for retaliationRetaliatory causal connectionAgency referral discriminationMembership classification referral or causing discriminationEmployer agency or union advertiserAge-based notice or advertisement
Rivera-Rivera v. Medina & Medina, Inc. — 898 F.3d 77 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018 (29usc623: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md))· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed

Elements 19–24 of 31

29 U.S.C. §§ 621–634
CaseWage reduction to complyEmployer agency union or combination maintaining a pension planEstablish or maintain an employee pension benefit planAge-based accrual or allocation cessation or reductionSubsection i pension qualifications and complianceConditional bona fide seniority system or benefit plan
Rivera-Rivera v. Medina & Medina, Inc. — 898 F.3d 77 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018 (29usc623: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md))· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed

Elements 25–30 of 31

29 U.S.C. §§ 621–634
CaseNarrow bona fide occupational qualificationDisplayed scope and specialized exclusionsCharge filing waiver and remediesForeign workplace conflict with local lawGood cause for employer discharge or disciplineJudicial outside-applicant coverage limit where circuit precedent controls
Rivera-Rivera v. Medina & Medina, Inc. — 898 F.3d 77 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018 (29usc623: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md))· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed· not addressed

Elements 31–31 of 31

29 U.S.C. §§ 621–634
CaseReasonable factors other than age
Rivera-Rivera v. Medina & Medina, Inc. — 898 F.3d 77 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018 (29usc623: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md))· not addressed

Instances and excluded annotation blocks

Annotation blocks, including explicitly excluded context
CaseElementHolding and scopePatternExact source quotations
Rivera-Rivera v. Medina & Medina, Inc. — 898 F.3d 77 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018 — satisfied · triable (29usc623: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md))Hiring discharge or employment termssatisfied
Counted merits instance
applied / merits

basis: triable

daily-age-taunts-by-owners-and-general-manager-as-hostile-work-environment
According to Rivera's statement-made under penalty of perjury, mind you--she was called "vieja" and told her age made her "useless" and "worthless"; she was excoriated for being "old" and "slow"; and she even was told she should seek out social security benefits and resign before getting terminated because her age interfered with the functions and duties of her job.
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_898.jsonl#/f3d/898/0077-01; Unicode character offsets [22281:22649] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be64c8b4debd470b0441ae1b9da004135e2b7606cc80df001bc6df2750d2e3d6.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Here, Rivera produces evidence that she was taunted about her age nearly every single day for over two years.
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_898.jsonl#/f3d/898/0077-01; Unicode character offsets [27936:28045] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be64c8b4debd470b0441ae1b9da004135e2b7606cc80df001bc6df2750d2e3d6.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

we have also made clear that "[f]requent incidents of harassment, though not severe, can reach the level of 'pervasive,' thereby altering the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment such that a hostile work environment exists."
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_898.jsonl#/f3d/898/0077-01; Unicode character offsets [27502:27736] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be64c8b4debd470b0441ae1b9da004135e2b7606cc80df001bc6df2750d2e3d6.

Evidence kind: rule; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

We thus conclude that summary judgment was not appropriate and Rivera's age-based hostile work environment claim lives to see another day.
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_898.jsonl#/f3d/898/0077-01; Unicode character offsets [28634:28772] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be64c8b4debd470b0441ae1b9da004135e2b7606cc80df001bc6df2750d2e3d6.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Rivera-Rivera v. Medina & Medina, Inc. — 898 F.3d 77 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018 — satisfied · conceded (29usc623: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md))Opposition or participationsatisfied
Counted merits instance
applied / merits

basis: conceded

filing-eeoc-and-adu-charges
While on sick leave, Rivera filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Puerto Rico Department of Labor Antidiscrimination Unit ("ADU"), as well as a similar charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") alleging that she suffered from age, sex, and gender discrimination.
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_898.jsonl#/f3d/898/0077-01; Unicode character offsets [3896:4185] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be64c8b4debd470b0441ae1b9da004135e2b7606cc80df001bc6df2750d2e3d6.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

There is no dispute here that Rivera engaged in protected conduct when she filed charges of discrimination with the EEOC and ADU.
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_898.jsonl#/f3d/898/0077-01; Unicode character offsets [30881:31010] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be64c8b4debd470b0441ae1b9da004135e2b7606cc80df001bc6df2750d2e3d6.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Rivera-Rivera v. Medina & Medina, Inc. — 898 F.3d 77 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018 — satisfied · triable (29usc623: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md))Retaliatory causal connectionsatisfied
Counted merits instance
applied / merits

basis: triable

termination-threats-expressly-tied-to-the-charges
In her affidavit (again, under penalty of perjury) Rivera explained that mere days following her filing of the EEOC and ADU charges, she began being subjected to threats of termination by Pepín.
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_898.jsonl#/f3d/898/0077-01; Unicode character offsets [33331:33525] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be64c8b4debd470b0441ae1b9da004135e2b7606cc80df001bc6df2750d2e3d6.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Here, Rivera was told on a repeated basis that she would be fired due to her filing of the charges with the ADU and EEOC.
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_898.jsonl#/f3d/898/0077-01; Unicode character offsets [38149:38270] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be64c8b4debd470b0441ae1b9da004135e2b7606cc80df001bc6df2750d2e3d6.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

The evidence presented, in other words, provides a causal connection between the harassment she allegedly suffered and her protected actions.
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_898.jsonl#/f3d/898/0077-01; Unicode character offsets [35633:35774] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be64c8b4debd470b0441ae1b9da004135e2b7606cc80df001bc6df2750d2e3d6.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Rivera-Rivera v. Medina & Medina, Inc. — 898 F.3d 77 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018 — satisfied · triable (29usc623: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md))Judicial material-adversity standard for retaliationsatisfied
Counted merits instance
applied / merits

basis: triable

The employer argued that post-charge harassment merely continued the pre-charge shouting; the court answered that the termination threats were new and tied to the charges. The court sustained a retaliatory constructive-discharge theory on the same evidence.
daily-threats-of-termination-after-charge-then-resignation
Indeed, Rivera explained that after she filed the charges, Pepín "screamed and shouted [at] me, and intimidated me by telling me that I was going to be discharged due to the discrimination charge[s] filed[,]" and that he "also referred to me with foul language, due to the discrimination charge filed."
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_898.jsonl#/f3d/898/0077-01; Unicode character offsets [33750:34052] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be64c8b4debd470b0441ae1b9da004135e2b7606cc80df001bc6df2750d2e3d6.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

But, upon her return back to work, she was "immediately" threatened once more with termination and was, again, shouted and screamed at "due to the discrimination charge filed."
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_898.jsonl#/f3d/898/0077-01; Unicode character offsets [34262:34438] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be64c8b4debd470b0441ae1b9da004135e2b7606cc80df001bc6df2750d2e3d6.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

A reasonable person could surely be dissuaded from reporting her employer's discriminatory acts if she knows she will be continuously threatened with termination as a direct result of protesting discriminatory treatment.
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_898.jsonl#/f3d/898/0077-01; Unicode character offsets [35775:35995] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be64c8b4debd470b0441ae1b9da004135e2b7606cc80df001bc6df2750d2e3d6.

Evidence kind: rule; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Given that Rivera alleges she was regularly threatened and intimidated with firing because she reported Medina for alleged discrimination, we believe there is at least a question of fact as to whether such harassment was severe or pervasive enough to constitute a retaliatory hostile work environment.
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_898.jsonl#/f3d/898/0077-01; Unicode character offsets [35996:36297] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be64c8b4debd470b0441ae1b9da004135e2b7606cc80df001bc6df2750d2e3d6.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Court interpretations recorded from this case