Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-employer’s motion for summary judgment in Title VII action alleging that defendant terminated plaintiff-employee on account of her gender and that it allowed her co-workers to create hostile work environment. Defendant explained that plaintiff was terminated because of her work performance that included her oversight of fraudulent wire transfer, and plaintiff failed to produce comparative male co-worker who had similar work/disciplinary history who received more favorable treatment. Also, plaintiff could not establish viable hostile environment claim, where: (1) plaintiff alleged two different periods of harassment that occurred from 2003 to 2009 and 2011 to 2012; (2) most of allegations in first period occurred outside relevant limitations period and could only be considered if plaintiff described “continuous conduct” rather than isolated instances; (3) plaintiff could not look to alleged instances of harassment that occurred outside limitations period since she could only recall unspecific instances of alleged harassment that could have occurred two to three years apart that otherwise did not establish single employment practice; and (4) instances of harassment that did occur during limitations period, which consisted of comments about plaintiff’s future pregnancy or comments about attire of others, did not interfere with plaintiff’s work performance and were too tepid to establish viable hostile environment claim.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Employment Discrimination