2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 7-15-2005 

# G igliott i v . PW C ampb ell C ontr P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 04-3192

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " G i gl iott i v . P W C amp be ll C ontr " (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 839. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/839NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL THE U NI TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS

F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT C as e N o: 04- 3192 L O U IS J. G IG L IO T T I, A ppel l ant v. P . W. CA M P BE L L CO NT RA CT I NG C O. O n A p p e a l f

ro m th e U n ited S tate s D istric t C o u rt f o r th e W e ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia D i s t r i ctC our tN o. : 02- C V - 1713 D istri ct Ju d g e: T h e H o n o rab le T erren ce F . M cV erry Subm i tt ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

J ul y1, 2005 B e f o re : N Y G A A R D * , S M IT H , a n d F IS H E R , C i r cui tJudges

( Fi l ed: J ul y15, 2005) OPI NI ON O F THE COURT S M IT H , C i r cui tJudge . L o u i s J . G i g l i o t t i a p p e a l s f r o m th e j u d g m e n to f

th e D i s t r i c tC o u r tg r a n t i n g P . W. C ampbel l C ont r act i ng C om pany ’ s m ot i on fors um m aryj udgm enton hi s cl ai m s thathe _________ * H onor abl e R i char d L . N y gaar d as s um ed s eni ors t atus on J ul y9, 20052

w as di s char ged i n vi ol at i on of the A ge D i s cr i m i nat i on i n E m pl oym entA ctof 1967 (“A D E A ”), 29 U . S . C . § 6 2 3 , an d the A m erican s w ith D isab il ityA ct of 1 9 9 0 (“A D A ”), 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 2 1 1 2 . T h e D is tr ic t C o u rt h a d ju ri s d ic tio n u n d e r 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 3 3 1 . A ppel l at e j ur i s di ct i on exi s t s pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 1291. W e exe r ci s e pl enaryr evi ew o v e r a g ra n t o f

s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t in a n e m p lo ym e n t d is c ri m in a tio n a p p e a l. D uf f y v. P aperMagi c G r oup, I

nc. , 2 6 5 F .3 d 1 6 3 , 1 6 6 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 1 ). G i g l i o t t i w a s h i r e d i n A u g u s t1 9 9 9 , a ta g e 5 9 , a s a p r o j e c tm a n a g e rf

o rP . W. C ampbel l . H e w or ked s t eadi l yunt i l he had kne e s ur geryi n N ovember2001. A l t hough P. W . C ampbel l ’ s m anage m entknew he w as t o have a ddi t i onal knee s ur geryi n 2002, J ames G . C al i endo, an exe cut i ve vi ce- pr es i dentand chi ef ope r at i ng offi cer , cont act ed G i gl i ot t i and enc our aged hi m t o r eturn t o w ork. G i gl i ot t i compl i ed w i t h t he r eques ton a par t - t i m e bas i s i n m i d- D ece m ber2001. C al i endo fur l oughed G i gl i ot t i , and fourot her e m p lo y e e s, o n Ja n u a ry7 , 2 0 0 2 a s p a rt o f a re stru c tu rin g p ro g ra m d e v e lo p e d to c o m b a t a “l ong- t erm er os i on of expe ct ed pr ofi t s . ” A t th e tim e o f

h is f u rlo u g h , G ig lio tti w a s h a n d lin g a sin g le c o n stru c tio n p rojec t. T hatpr oj ectw as t aken ove rbyJ ames G er dun, vi ce- pr es i dentof oper at i ons . G er dun dis cov ered several problem s w i t h the proj ect , i ncludi ng ov erbi l l i ng , “nu m erous, unr ecor ded, unpr oces s ed and unpr oj ect ed s ubcontr act orchange or der s ” ca us i ng a l os s of $35, 000, and comm uni cat i on pr obl ems w i t h t he cus t om er . T her eaf t er , G i gl i ot t i as ked C al i endo fora r efe r ence l et t ert o pr ovi de a pr os pect i ve empl oy er . I n a l ett erdat ed3

F e b ru a ry2 2 , 2 0 0 2 , P .W . C a m p b e ll’s c o n tro ller a n d H R a d m in istra to r re jec ted th e re q u e st, expl ai ni ng t hatt he company ’ s pol i cyw as t o pr ovi de conf i r m at i on of onl ythe dat es of a form erempl oy ee’ s empl oym ent . T he l et t erfur t hers t at ed Si nce y ourt erm i nat i on fr om P. W . C ampbel l , w e have l earned of s ever al n eg ati v e a n d co stl yincid en ts th at oc cu rred d u ri n g the tim e y o u w ere em p loy ed , o n p rojec ts w h ere y o u w ere assig n ed as P rojec t M an ag er. I n l i g h to f y o u ru n s a t i s f

a c t o r yp e r f

o r ma n c e o n th e s e p r o

j e c t s th a th a s j u s tc o me t o ourat t ent i on, w e ar e unw i l l i ng t o pr ovi de y ou w i t h a fa vor abl e r efe r ence o r o f f e r yo u e m p lo ym e n t a t P .W . C a m p b e ll if th e o p p o rt u n ity a ri s e s . T h e r e a f t e r , G i g l i o t t i f

i l e d a c o m p l a i n ti n O c t o b e r2 0 0 2 a l l e g i n g th a tP . W. C a m p b e l l ’ s c o n d u c tw a s a v i o l a t i o n o f th e A D E A a n d A D A . I n r e s o l v i n g P . W. C ampbel l ’ s s um m aryj udgm entm ot i on, the D i s t r i ctC our tconcl uded thatG i gl i ot t i had a d d u c e d a p rim a f

a c ie c a se u n d e r b o th th e A D E A a n d th e A D A , an d th a t P .W . C a m p b e ll had pr offe r ed a l egi t i m at e non- di s cr i m i nat oryr eas on forG i gl i ot t i ’ s i ni t i al fur l ough and t he s ubs equentdeci s i on, as s etfor t h i n t he February22 l ett er , nott o r ehi r e hi m . T he D i s t r i ctC our tnot ed thatG i gl i ot t i t r i ed t o cas tdoubton P. W . C ampbel l ’ s pr offe r ed expl anat i ons on t hr ee f

r ont s . Fi r s t , G i gl i ot t i chal l enged hi s empl oy er ’ s cont ent i on thatt he companyw as notpr ofi t abl e. Second, G i gl i ot t i ar gued thatcert ai n r emar ks ut t er ed by companyoffi ci al s i ndi cat ed a bi as agai ns thi s age a nd hi s phy s i cal abi l i t i es , and thats uch r emar ks w er e cons i s t entw i t h t he company ’ s pol i cyof r et ai ni ng and hi r i ng y ounger w or ker s . Fi nal l y , G i gl i ot t i as s er t ed thatthe r eas on fornotr ehi r i ng hi m w as a pos thoc f a b ri c a tio n a n d th a t th e c o m p a n yh a d p re v io u s ly co n s id e re d h is w o rk s a tis f a c to ry. T he D i s t r i ctC our tw as notper s uaded. I tconcl uded thatthe evi dence s how ed that4

t he company , i n fac t , had pr obl ems w i t h i t s pr ofi t abi l i t y . T he company ’ s ow er s , J ohn and J ames Cam pbel l , had notr ece i ved ei t heral l oranydefe r r ed compens at i on dur i ng cal endar y ea rs 20 0 0 , 2 0 0 1 an d 2 0 0 2 , as th eyh ad rou ti n elyrec eive d in the p ast. T h e C o u rt acknow l edged thatt her e w er e s om e s t r ayr emar ks r efl ect i ve of G i gl i ot t i ’ s age a nd l i m i t ed m obi l i t y , butt hatt hos e s t at ement s w er e notut t er ed bythe dec i s i onm akerand di d not i ndi cat e bi as . G i gl i ot t i ’ s cont ent i on thatthe companyhad a hi s t oryof r et ai ni ng and hi r i ng y oungerw or ker s w as i ns uffi ci entt o cas tdoubton t he company ’ s r eas on forpl aci ng G i gl i ot t i on fur l ough. T he C our tr eas oned thati tw as undi s put ed thatG i gl i ot t i and a n o th e r p rojec t m a n a g e r w e re f u rlo u g h e d b e c a u se th e yw e re e a c h a d m in iste rin g a sin g le p roje c t, in c o n tr a s t to th e m u ltip le p roje c ts h a n d le d b yth e o th e r t h re e p roje c t m a n a g e rs . W h il e so m e y o u n g er e m p loy ee s w ere h ir ed there af ter, n o n e o f th e y o u n g er h ir es w ere empl oy ed as pr oj ectm anage r s . A l t hough the r eas on fornotr ehi r i ng G i gl i ot t i w as arti cu lat ed af

ter his fu rl o u g h an d h is w o rk h ad b ee n d ee m ed ac ce p table b ef o re, th e C o u rt r eas oned thatt he “f

ul l m agni tude” of

the per form ance pr obl ems had notbeen a ppar ent u n til G ig lio tti ’s p rojec t w a s ta k e n o v e r b yG e rd u n . T h u s, G ig lio tti ’s a rg u m e n t w a s s im p ly t hatt he companyhad made t he w r ong deci s i on. W hetherthe dec i s i on w as w i s e or p rud en t, as th e D istri ct C o u rtp o inted o u t, w as n o t eno u g h u n d er Fu e n tes v . P e rs k ie , 32 F. 3d 759, 765 ( 3d C i r . 1994) , t o defe ata s um m aryj udgm entm ot i on. A ft ercar eful l yr evi ew i ng t he r ecor d, w e agr ee w i t h t he D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s thought ful a n a lysis . A c c o rd in g ly, w e w ill a f f ir m th e ju d g m e n t o f

th e D is tr ic t C o u rt f

o r P .W .C o n tr a c tin g C o m p a n y .