## United States Court of App eals

F O R T H E E I G H T H C I R C U I T

__ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 1- 16 82

__ __ __ __ __ _ * Ja co bi a Twig gs , * * Pl ai nt iff - App el le e, *

* App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s

v. * Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r th e * East ern Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s. Jo hn Sel ig , Ind iv id ua ll y

an d i n h is * Offi ci al Cap aci ty as Dire ct or of t he * Dep art m en t o f Hum an Serv ic es ; Ro n * Ang el , Ind iv id ua ll y

an d i n h is Offic ia l * Cap aci ty as DYS Dire ct or , * * Defen da nt s - Ap pe ll an ts

. *

__ __ __ __ __ _
Su bm it te d: Decem

be r 14 , 20 11 Fi le d: Ju ne 4, 2 01 2

__ __ __ __ __ _
Befo re WOL LMAN, MELLOY, and COLLOTON, Cir cu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ _ MELLOY, Circu it Ju dg e.

Defen da nt s Ro n Ang el an d Jo hn Sel ig ap pe al fro m th e di st ric t co ur t ' s de ni al
of su m m ary jud gm en t o n th e ba si s of qu al ifi ed im m un it y

. Defen da nt s rai se d th is
de fen se ag ai ns t Ja co bi a Twig gs 's cl ai m of ge nd er di sc riminat io n, whi ch sh e br ou gh t
aft er be in g fir ed fo r un tru th fu ln es s in co nn ect io n wit h th e rel eas e of a y ou th res id en t
fro m res id en ti al cu st od y

. W e rev ers e th e di st ric t co ur t, fin di ng Ang el an d Sel ig areen ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m un it y be cau se Twig gs ha s no t es ta bl is he d a co ns ti tu ti on a l
vi ol at io n.

I

Befo re he r em

pl oym en t was t erm in at ed

, Twig gs was In ta ke an d Pl acement
Dire ct or in th e Ark an sa s Dep art m en t of Hum an Serv ic es , Div is io n of You th Serv ic es (DYS). Twig gs wor ke d un de r th e su pe rv is io n of Dire ct or of DYS, Ro n Ang el

. Jo hn
Sel ig was th e Dire ct or of th e Ark an sa s Dep art m en t of H u man Serv ic es an d th e ul ti m at e su pe rv is or

of a ll DYS em

pl oyees. DYS co nt ract ed wit h a co m pa ny ca ll ed
G4S to pr ov id e res id en ti al se rv ic e s, in cl ud in g se cu rit y , co un se li ng tre at m en t, se xof fen de r tre at m en t, ed uc at io na l se rv ic es , an d ot he r rel at ed tre at m en t se rv ic e s fo r juv en il es at t he faci li ty.

On May 1, 20 09
, th e de pa rtment rel eas ed se ve ral y ou th s who ha d be en he ld in

res id en ti al cu st od y to co m m un it y -b as ed tre at m en t, a le s s r e st ric ti ve tre at m en t

pr og ram

. One of th e y ou th s rel eas ed

, A.T., al l e g e d ly co m m it te d a m

ur de r sh or tl y aft er h i s r el eas e. Afte r th e m ur de r, Ang el he ld a m eet in g to in qu ire in to th e ci rcu m st an ces le ad in g to A.T.'s rel eas e. Ang el

, Twig gs , a nd th ree ot he r DYS

em pl oyees were pr es en t at th e m eet in g: Ass is ta nt D i r e c t o r fo r Res id en ti al Serv ic es Kim Luc ke tt , Seri ou s an d Vio le nt O f f e n d e r Ree nt ry In it ia ti ve cas e co or di na to r Tom m y B r a n c h, an d Ass is ta nt Dire ct or fo r Co m m un it y -Bas ed Serv ic es Elb ert
Grim es

. Ang el as ke d th e em pl oyees pr es en t whe th er an y on e kn ew whe th er th e G4S

tre at m en t te am ha d vo ic ed co nc ern s ab ou t A.T. pr io r to hi s rel eas e. Eve ry em pl oyee Ang el as ke d an swe red th at th ey kn ew of no co nc ern s ab ou t A.T. pr io r to th e rel eas e.

Im m ed ia te ly aft er th is m eet in g, Tom m y Bran ch ap pr oa ch ed A nge l an d sa id tha t
he an d Twig gs ha d be en aware of co nc ern s ab ou t A.T. be fo re hi s rel eas e. Bran ch to ld Ang el th at a G4S wor ke r sp eci fic al ly vo ic ed co nc ern s ab ou t A.T. whe n Bran ch was

-2

-ge tt in g pa pe rwo rk si gn ed fo r th e rel eas e an d th at Bran ch ha d rel ay ed th es e co nc ern s

to Twig gs

.

Afte r Bran ch 's co nf

es si on , Ang el m et wit h wit ne ss es an d co ll ect ed st at em en ts
fro m DYS an d G4S wor ke rs

. In th e co ur se of th is in ve st ig at io n, Ang el ob ta i n e d a rel eas e su m

m ary fo r A.T. th at co nt ai ne d a do cu m en t el ect ro ni cal ly si gn ed by Twig gs th e ni gh t b e f

o r e A

. T.'s rel eas e. Thi s do cu m en t sh owe d in fo rm at io n fro m G4S

reco m m en di ng ag ai ns t A.T.'s rel eas e. Ang el al so in te rv ie wed Twig gs , who ag ai n de ni ed ha vi ng kn owl ed ge of co nc ern s ab ou t A.T. pr io r t o h i s r el eas e. Ang el

co ns eq ue nt ly de te rm in ed th at Twig gs h ad be en un tru th fu l wit h hi m on m ul ti pl e

oc cas io ns

. In co nt ras t, he de te rm in ed th at al th ou gh Bran ch li ed du rin g th e m eet in g, he co rrec te d hi m se lf im m ed ia te ly a fte r th e m eet in g, an d th at Luc ke tt , Grim es , an d
W al ke r ha d no t be en un tru th fu l du rin g th e m eet in g. Co ns eq ue nt ly, Ang el de ci de d no t

to di sc ip li ne th os e em

pl oyees. Afte r m ak in g th es e d e t erm in at io ns , An ge l m et wit h

se ve ral of hi s su pe rio rs , in cl ud in g Sel ig

, an d br ie fed th em on th e res ul ts of hi s in ve st ig at io n an d th e co nc lu si on s h e ha d dr awn fro m it

. Tho se pr es en t di sc us se d

op ti on s fo r di sc ip li ni ng Twig gs

.

On Ju ly 2 3, 20 09 , An ge l met w i t h Twig gs an d in fo rm ed he r of th e res ul ts of
h i s i n v e s t ig at io n an d hi s co nc lu si on th at Twig gs ha d li ed ab ou t he r kn owl ed ge o f

co nc ern s ab ou t A.T. pr io r to hi s rel eas e. Dur in g th at m eet in g, he ga ve Twig gs a le tt er in fo rm in g he r th at he was co ns id eri ng di sc ip li na ry act io n ag ai ns t he r an d gi vi ng he r

an op po rtu ni ty to p ro vi de hi m wit h re bu tt al or e xt en ua ti ng fact or s.

Ang el an d Twig gs m et ag ai n fo ur da y s la te r, an d Twig gs ag ai n de ni ed th at sh e ha d kn owl ed ge of co nc ern s ab ou t A.T. pr io r to hi s rel eas e. Afte r th at m eet in g, Ang el

ag ai n m et wit h Seli g and sev eral ot he r su pe rv is or s an d d is cu ss ed op ti on s re ga rd in g Twi gg s's fu rth er em

pl oym en t. Ang el ul ti m at el y de ci de d to te rm in at e Twig gs ' s

em pl oym en t be cau se he co ul d no lo ng er tru st he r. Sel ig ap pr ov ed th is de ci si on

. On Apr il 30 , 2 00 9, Ang el pr es en te d Twig gs wit h a ter m in at io n l et te r, effe ct iv e Aug us t

-3

-14
, se tt in g ou t t h e s p e ci fic po li cy vi ol at io ns he co nc lu de d Twig gs ha d co m m it te d,

m os t i m po rta nt ly his co nc lu si on th at Twig gs ha d b een di sh on es t wi th hi m

.

Twig gs su bs eq ue nt ly br ou gh t th is ge nd er di sc riminat io n act io n un de r Tit le VII

an d 42 U.S.C. § 19 83
, al le gi ng , in te r a l i a , th at Sel ig an d Ang el

, in th ei r in di vi du al

an d of f i c i a l cap aci ti es , di sc riminat ed ag ai ns t he r on th e ba si s of ge nd er whe n th ey
te rm in at ed he r em

pl oym en t. Sel ig an d Ang el m ov ed fo r su m m ary jud gm en t, arg ui ng 1

th at (1 ) Twig gs co ul d no t est ab li sh a pr im a faci e cas e of ge nd er di sc riminat io n, an d

ev en if sh e co ul d, sh e co ul d no t sh ow th e le gi ti m at e, no nd is cri m in at or y rat io na le fo r he r te rm in at io n was pr et ex tu al ; an d (2 ) ev en if Twig gs co ul d s h o w a co ns ti tu ti on al
vi ol at io n, Sel ig an d Ang el were en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m un it y in th e i r in di vi du al

cap aci ti es

.

The di st ric t co ur t de ni ed bo th Ang el 's an d Sel ig 's m ot io ns to di sm is s, ho ld in g th at "a reas on ab le juro r co ul d co nc lu de th at ge nd er was a m ot iv at in g fact or in th e de pa rtment' s de ci si on

. " F o r su pp or t th e di st ric t co ur t no te d a "s li gh t va ria ti on "
be twee n th e reas on s fo r te rm in at io n gi ve n to Twig gs an d th os e st at ed in a ne wsp ap er
art ic le

, th e fact th at Twig gs was th e on ly fem al e in vo lv ed in th e A.T. cas e an d als o 2

th e on ly pe rs on te rm in at ed

, th at Ang el 's in ve st ig at io n "s eem ed to fo cu s on he r al m os t
im m ed ia te ly," an d th at "[t ]he de pa rtment' s po li cy sa y s th at no lying

, pe rio d, an d y et
th ere wer e at lea st th ree p eo pl e, I th in k, t ha t s ho ul d hav e sa id m or e th an th ey di d i n th e m eet in g, at lea st th e Ju ly 16t h m eet in g."

Twig gs al so or ig in al ly br ou gh t cl ai m s un de r th e Equ al Pay Act, t he fed eral 1 Co ns ti tu ti on 's Due Pro ces s Cl au se , an d th e Ark an sa s Wh i s t l eb lo wer Act. Tho se cl ai m s were al l ei th er di sm is se d or ab an do ne d by Tw i g g s , an d are no t pa rt of th is
pr es en t ap pe al

.
All ot he r pe rs on s d is cu ss ed in th is op in io n a re m al e. 2

-4

-II

"A de fen da nt m ay im m ed ia t e ly ap pe al a di st ric t co ur t's de ni al of qu al ifi ed
im m un it y un de r th e co ll at eral or de r do ct rin e." Ott m an v. Ci ty of In de pe nd en ce, Mo
., 34 1 F.3 d 75 1, 75 5– 56 (8 th Ci r. 20 03 ). W e ha ve juri sd ic ti on in th is cas e be cau se th e ch al le ng e to th e de ni al of su m m ar y ju dg m en t "t ur ns on an is su e of la w." Fi el ds v. Abb ot t, 65 2 F.3 d 88 6, 88 9– 90 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (ci ta ti on om it te d)

. W e rev ie w th e di st ric t co ur t's de ni al of q ua li fie d i m m un it y de no vo . Ottm an , 34 1 F .3d at 7 56

.

Pl ai nt iff s m ay es ta bl is h a cl ai m of un co ns ti tu ti on al di sc riminat io n un de r Tit le
VII us in g ei th er d i r e c t or ci rcu m st an ti al ev id en ce. McDo nn el l Dou gl as Co rp

. v. Green
, 41 1 U.S. 79 2, 80 2– 05 (1 97 3)

. Twig gs di d no t pr es en t di rect ev id en ce of
di sc riminat io n, so to su rv iv e Ang el 's su m m ary jud gm en t m ot io n, sh e m us t es ta bl is h

ge nd er di sc riminat io n th ro ug h th e McDo nn el l Dou gl as bu rd en -s hi fti ng fram ewo rk

. Ro dg ers v. U.S. Ban k, N.A., 41 7 F .3d 84 5, 85 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ), ab ro ga te d on ot he r
gr ou nd s by Torg ers on v. Ci ty of Ro ch es te r, 64 3 F.3 d 10 31 (8 th Ci r. 2 0 11 ). Fi rs t,
Tw ig gs m ay es ta bl is h a pr es um pt io n of di sc riminat io n in he r pr im a faci e cas e b y a

m in im al ev id en ti ary sh owi ng th at sh e was tre at ed le ss fav o rab ly th an a si m il arl y si tu at ed em

pl oyee no t a m em

be r of a pr ot ect ed cl as s. Id

. Ang el an d Sel ig th en be ar th e bu rd en of pr ov id in g a "n on -d is cri m in at or y , le gi ti m at e jus ti fic at io n fo r [ t h e ir]

co nd uc t, whi ch reb ut s th e em pl oyee's pr im a faci e cas e." Id

. (ci ta ti on om it te d)

. Onc e th e em pl oyer pr ov id es th is reas on , "t he p r e s u mpti on of di sc riminat io n di sa pp ears , req ui rin g th e pl ai nt iff to pr ov e th at th e pr of fere d jus ti fic at io n is m erel y a pr et ex t fo r di sc riminat io n." Id. (c it at io n o m it te d)

.

Bec au se we fin d Twig gs 's cl ai m of ge n d e r d i s cri m in at io n fai ls at th e pr et ex t

st ag e of th is an al y si s, we as su m e th at sh e ha s es ta bl is he d he r pr im a faci e cas e. Ang el

an d Sel ig ha ve pr ov id ed a no n- di sc riminat or y , le gi ti m at e reas on fo r fir in g Twig gs bu t

no t Bran ch : Bran ch cam e to Ang el of hi s own vo li ti on im m ed ia te ly aft er th e May 19

-5

-m eet in g an d co nf es se d hi s li e, whe re as Twig gs st oo d by he r or ig in al

, un tru e st at em en t

ov er t he ne xt sev eral m on th s.

The bu rd en th en sh ift s t o Twi gg s to sh ow th at Ang el 's an d Sel ig 's pr of fere d

reas on was pr et ex tu al

, an d th at th ey di d no t fir e he r be cau se sh e was un tru th fu l, bu t

rat he r as a res ul t of ge nd er di sc riminat io n. Sh e at te m pt s to do so by arg ui ng th at sh e 3

an d Bran ch were si m il arl y si tu at ed in th e i r m is co nd uc t, an d th eref or e th at Ang el 's
di sp arat e tre at m en t of th em w a s d i s cri m in at or y

. Fo r th e pu rp os es of th e pr et ex t
in qu i r y, Tw i g g s was no t si m il arl y si tu at ed to Bran ch

. At th is st ag e, Twig gs m us t

sa ti sf y a m or e rig or ou s st an da rd an d sh ow th at sh e a n d " t h e in di vi du al s us ed fo r

co m pa ris on

. . . de al t wit h th e sa m e su pe rv is or , [were ] su bjec t to th e sa m e st an da rd s,

an d en ga ge d in th e sa m e co nd uc t wit ho ut an y m it ig at in g or di st in gu is hi ng ci rcu m st an ces ." Ch erry v. Ri te no ur Sch

. D i s t ., 36 1 F.3 d 47 4, 47 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 04 ) (ci ta ti on om it te d)

. Un d e r t h is st an da rd

, Twig gs an d Bran ch were no t si m il arl y si tu at ed . Un li ke wit h B ran ch , th ere wer e n o m it ig at in g ci rcu m st an ces fo r Twig gs 's

m is co nd uc t. Twig gs no t on ly li ed to Ang el in th e in i t i a l, May 19 m eet in g, bu t

co nt in ue d to li e to hi m ov er th e ne xt few m on th s as Ang el in ve st ig at ed th e in ci de nt

. In co nt ras t, Bran ch 's in it ia l l i e w a s qu ic kl y m it ig at ed by hi s co rrec ti on of it
im m ed ia te ly after t he May 19 m eet in g.

Twig gs al so at te m

pt s to sh ow th at Ang e l's reas on s fo r fir in g he r were
pr et ex tu al by po in ti ng to an award fo r em pl oyee of th e y ear th at Twig gs ha d rece iv ed
th e y ear be fo re sh e was fir ed

, Ang el 's an d DYS's "s hi fti ng ex pl an at io ns " of he r fir in g,

an d DYS's "s ub

jecti ve po li ci es " reg ard in g em pl oyees lying

. Non e of th es e arg um en ts

are co nv in ci ng

. Fi rs t, al th ou gh "[a ] hi st or y of po si ti ve pe rfo rm an ce ev al ua ti on s can be po werfu l ev id en ce of sa ti sf act or y pe rfo rm an ce," em

pl oyers "m ay c h o o s e to rel y

Twig gs do es no t m ak e a se rio us arg um en t th at sh e di d no t li e ab ou t ha vi ng 3 kn owl ed ge ab ou t pro bl em s wi th A.T. prio r to hi s re le as e, an d i n l ig ht of t he rel eas e

su m m ary Twig gs si gn ed an d st at em en ts of ot he r DYS em pl oyees, th ere is no m at eri al fact ua l d is pu te on th is po in t.

-6

-on rece nt pe rfo rm an ce m or e he av il y th an pa st pe rfo rm an ce." Eric ks on v. Farm la nd

In du s., In c., 27 1 F.3 d 71 8, 72 8– 29 (8 th Ci r. 20 01 ). Here, whi le it is tru e th at Twig gs

rece iv ed a po si ti ve pe rfo rm an ce ev al ua ti on fro m DYS, th e sp eci fic in ci de nt s th at le d

to Twig gs 's te rm in at io n oc cu rred aft er th at ev al ua ti on

. Ang el an d DYS were en ti tl ed

t o r el y on th os e ev en ts , rat he r th an so le ly th e pe rfo rm an ce ev al ua ti on , in t h e i r de ci si on to ter m in at e Twig gs 's e m pl oym en t.

Seco nd ly, a su bs ta nt ia l ch an ge in an em pl oyer's le gi ti m at e, no nd is cri m in at or y

reas on fo r fir in g an em

pl oyee m ay be pr ob at iv e of pr et ex t, bu t we ha ve be en cl ear th at
th es e di sc rep an ci es m

us t act ua ll y be su bs t a n t i al

. See E.E.O. C. v. Tran sS ta te s Airl in es , In c., 4 6 2 F

. 3 d 9 8 7, 99 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ). W he re em pl oyers "g av e two

co m pl et el y di ffer en t ex pl an at io ns for th ei r de ci si on s t o t erm in at e th ei r em pl oyees,"

su ch a s u b s t an ti al ch an ge is es ta bl is he d. Id

. (ci ti ng Bri sc oe v. Fred 's Dol la r St or e, In c., 24 F.3 d 10 26
, 10 27 –2 8 (8 th Ci r. 19 94 ) an d E.E

. O

. C

. v

. Eth an All en , In c., 44
F.3 d 11 6, 12 0 (2 d Ci r. 19 94 )). Howev er, whe re th e em pl oyer "h as no t wav ered fro m it s on e ex pl an at io n fo r te rm in at in g" th e em pl oyee, th ere i s n o s u bs ta nt ia l ch an ge

. Tr a n s St at e Airl in es , In c., 46 2 F.3 d at 99 5. Here, Twig gs arg ue s th at th ere w a s a

su bs ta nt ia l ch an ge be cau se of v a r i o u s acco un ts of he r te rm in at io n in lo cal ne ws
rep or ts

. Howe v er, al l ex pl an at io ns of th e fir in g, bo th to th e ne ws m ed ia

, an d to Twig gs he rs el f, rev ol ve d aro un d th e rel eas e of A.T. Thu s, an y sh ift in ex pl a n a t i on

was no t s ub st an ti al

.

Fi na ll y , Twig gs arg ue s th at Ang el 's an d Sel ig 's rel ia nc e on a su bjec ti ve po li cy

o n em pl oyee lying to jus ti fy te rm in at in g he r em pl oym en t is ev id e n c e o f
di sc riminat io n. W hi le "an em pl oyer's as se rte d rel ia nc e on su bjec ti ve fact or s

. . . is to
be cl os el y sc ru ti ni zed fo r di sc riminat or y ab us e," O'Co nn or v. Peru St at e Co ll eg e, 78 1
F.2 d 63 2, 63 7– 38 (8 th Ci r. 19 86 ), rel ia nc e on su ch fact or s by it se lf is in su ffi ci en t to

es ta bl is h di sc riminat io n. Tay lo r v. W hi te , 32 1 F.3 d 71 0, 71 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 03 ). Here,
th ere is no ev id en c e Ang el

, Sel ig

, or DYS us ed th e su bjec ti ve po li cy on em pl oyee

-7

-di sh on es ty in a d i s c r i mina to ry way , an d th is po li cy al on e can no t be th e ba si s fo r

Twig gs 's c la im

of d is cri m in at io n.

Bec au se Twig gs ha s fai le d to of fer ev id en ce th at co ul d co nv in ce a reas on ab le jury th at Ang el 's an d DYS's st at ed reas on fo r fir in g he r was p ret ex t fo r in te nt io na l
di sc r i mi n a t i o n , he r cl ai m fai ls as a m at te r of la w, an d bo th Ang el an d Sel ig are

en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m

un it y . See Ott m an , 34 1 F .3d at 7 58

.

The jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t i s ac co rd in gl y rev ers ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

-8

-