Summary judgment in employer’s favor was appropriate where the employer’s legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for firing plaintiff were, in sum, sufficient to rebut the evidence of discrimination, and plaintiff failed to persuasively argue that these non-discriminatory reasons were pretextual.
Hittle was a fire chief in the City of Stockton from 2005 to 2011. His employer terminated him for alleged misconduct. He sued the city, claiming he was fired due to his Christian faith. In response, the employer presented a 250-page report detailing his misconduct.[2]
In May 2024, the Ninth Circuit denied Hittle's petition for a panel rehearing and a rehearing en banc. The court affirmed and amended its 2023 decision.[5][6]
The court ruled that the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework governs employment discrimination claims under Title VII and California FEHA. The court found that the employer had provided legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for Hittle's termination. Because Hittle did not convincingly argue that these reasons were a pretext for religious discrimination, summary judgment for the employer was upheld.[6]
Subsequent developments
Hittle filed certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court in October 2024.[7] The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear his appeal. Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented, with Justice Thomas stating, "I would have taken this opportunity to revisit McDonnell Douglas and decide whether its burden-shifting framework remains a workable and useful evidentiary tool."[8][9][10]
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
