Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-04143/USCOURTS-ca10-90-04143-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 

---

.... 

FILE D 

United States Co·1rt o1 Appe&ls 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 'f'.--,...f'I, ri.-,.nit 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT APR 2 2 1991 

LORINO. ROBINSON, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

SEARS, ROEBUCK AND COMPANY, INC., a 

New York corporation; CHARLES O'BRIEN, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 90-4143 

(D.C. No. 89-CV-7) 

(D. Utah) 

Before ANDERSON, TACHA, Circuit Judges, and KANE,** District 

Judge. 

**Honorable John L. 

District Court for 

designation. 

Kane, Senior District Judge, United States 

the District of Colorado, sitting by 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. 

submitted without oral argument. 

* 

The case is therefore ordered 

This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 90-4143 Document: 010110034278 Date Filed: 04/22/1991 Page: 1 
• .I 

Plaintiff appeals from a district court order granting 

summary judgment in favor of defendants, his former corporate 

employer and immediate supervisor. Specifically, the district 

court rejected plaintiff's claims for (1) unpaid overtime 

compensation due under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. 

§ 201, et~, (2) breach of an implied contract to pay plaintiff 

on a salaried rather than hourly basis, (3) maintenance of a work 

environment hostile to plaintiff because of his active religious 

affiliation, in violation of Title VII, 42 u.s.c. § 2000e, et 

~, (4) denial of immediate payment of pension benefits upon 

resignation from employment, in violation of the Employee 

Retirement Insurance Security Act, 29 u.s.c. § 1001, et~, and 

(5) common law fraud in connection with plaintiff's decision to 

resign. 

We review the district court's grant of summary judgment de 

nova, applying the same legal standard used by the district court 

under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). Green v. Henley, 924 F.2d 185, 186 

(10th Cir. 1991). Summary judgment is proper if "there is no 

genuine issue as to any material fact and ... the moving party 

is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 

56(c); see Green, 924 F.2d at 186. 

We reach substantially the same conclusions as the district 

court on all but the third claim asserted by plaintiff. 1 In this 

1 We note that our analysis of plaintiff's allegations 

regarding the misrepresentation of pension benefit availability 

differs somewhat in focus from that of the district court. We do 

not decide whether plaintiff did, in fact, rely upon such a 

misrepresentation in electing to resign from employment, since we 

hold that, as a matter of law, such reliance would have been 

(continued on next page) 

2 

Appellate Case: 90-4143 Document: 010110034278 Date Filed: 04/22/1991 Page: 2 
latter regard, the district court held that the evidence showed 

only "that religious discrimination was, at best, an insignificant 

element in the conflict between [plaintiff] Robinson and 

[defendant] O'Brien," and, consequently, plaintiff had failed to 

establish a triable issue of religious discrimination. District 

Court's Memorandum Decision and Order at 20-22. Upon examining 

the factual record and all reasonable inferences to be drawn 

therefrom in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, 

Green, 924 F.2d at 186, we cannot agree with this assessment. 

Plaintiff's deposition testimony, relating malicious, vitriolic 

religious slurs and attendant threats allegedly directed at 

plaintiff by defendant O'Brien, clearly permits an inference that 

O'Brien's increasingly adverse conduct toward plaintiff was 

animated by religious enmity. That is not to say, of course, that 

the trier of fact must ultimately accept plaintiff's version of 

the events surrounding his employment and resignation; we hold 

only that, on the record before us, summary judgment was not 

proper on the basis expressed by the district court. 

The judgment of the United States District Court is AFFIRMED 

in all respects except insofar as it denied plaintiff's claim for 

(continued from previous page) 

unjustified in any event. See generally Larson v. Wycoff Co., 624 

P.2d 1151, 1155-56 (Utah 1981); Petty v. Gindy Mfg. Corp., 404 

P.2d 30, 32 (Utah 1965). 

3 

Appellate Case: 90-4143 Document: 010110034278 Date Filed: 04/22/1991 Page: 3 
religious discrimination. The latter ruling is REVERSED, and the 

cause is REMANDED for further proceedings. 

Entered for the Court 

John L. Kane 

Senior District Judge 

4 

Appellate Case: 90-4143 Document: 010110034278 Date Filed: 04/22/1991 Page: 4