2009 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 12-8-2009 

# W i lli am H ou s t on v

. E a s t on Are a S cho ol D i s t 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 . 09-1632

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_2009

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 2009 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 " W i ll i am H ous t on v

. Eas t on Ar e a S choo l Di s t " (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 130. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009/130NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 09- 1632 WI L L I AM HOUS T ON,

A ppel l ant v. EAS TON AREA S CHOOL DI S TRI CT O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia D . C . C i vi l A ct i on N o. 03- cv- 03494 ( H onor abl e H enryS. Per ki n) Subm i tt ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

N ovember2, 2009 B e f o re : S C IR IC A , C hi ef

Judge , J O R D A N a n d G R E E N B E R G , C i r cui tJudges . ( Fi l ed: D ece m ber8, 2009) OPI NI ON O F THE COURT S C IR IC A , C hi ef

Judge . W ill iam H o u sto n re tired f ro m h is p o sitio n w ith th e E a sto n A re a S c h o o l D istric t in J ul y1999. H ous t on br oughts ui tunderT i t l e V I I of the C i vi l R i ght s A ctof 1964, as amended, 42 U . S. C . §§ 2000e t o 2000e- 17, al l egi ng the School D i s t r i ctdi s cr i m i nat edT he D i s t r i ctC our thad j ur i s di ct i on under28 U . S. C . § 1331, and w e have j ur i s di ct i on 1 under28 U . S. C . § 1291. 2 a g a in st h im b a se d o n h is ra c e (A f ric a n A m e ric a n ) w h e n h e re c e iv e d p a ym e n t f o r o n ly 2 5 % o f th e v a lu e o f

h is u n u se d sic k d a y s u p o n h is re tirem e n t, w h ile f o u r c o m p a ra b le w h ite e m p lo y e e s re c e iv e d p a ym e n t f o r 1 0 0 % o f

th e ir u n u se d sic k d a y s u p o n th e ir re sp e c tiv e re tirem e n ts. T h e D istric t C o u rt g ra n ted in p a rt th e S c h o o l D istric t’s m o tio n in l i m i ne, excl udi ng evi dence of the r et i r ementpacka ges of thr ee of the foural l eged c o m p a ra to rs o n th e b a sis th a t th e yw e re n o t sim ilarlysitu a ted to H o u sto n b e c a u se th e ir pos i t i ons w er e notcover ed undera Penns y l vani a s t atut e comm onl yknow n as A ct93, 24 P. S. § 11- 1164. H ous t on chal l enges the court ’ s excl us i on of compar at orevi dence fr om the tr i al . B eca us e w e fi nd A ct93 s t atus s houl d nothave be en det erm i nat i ve as t o w hether the empl oy ees w er e s i m i l ar l ys i tuat ed t o H ous t on, w e w i l l vaca t e the j udgm entof the D istric t C o u rt. 1 I. A tt he end of

hi s 34- y earcar eerw i t h t he School D i s t r i ct , H ous t on w as empl oy ed as the D i r ect orof Suppor tSer vi ces . I n t hi s pos i t i on, H ous t on w as a mem berof the su p e rin ten d e n t’s c a b in e t, w h ich w a s a n u n o f f icia l term u se d b yth e S c h o o l D istric t to des i gnat e the mem ber s of the s uper i nt endent ’ s admi ni s t r at i ve t eam. H ous t on w as appoi nt ed t o t he ca bi netbySuper i nt endentJ os eph Pi azz a i n 1995 or1996. H ous t on se rv e d o n S u p e rin ten d e n t P iaz z a ’s c a b in e t co n tem p o ra n e o u slyw ith e m p lo y e e s L o u isPi azz a, C i cca r el l i , H ett el , and W r azi en ar e C auca s i an. 2 H o u sto n tes tifie d th a t at th e tim e h e su b m itt e d h is re sig n a tio n lette r, itw a s h is 3 u n d e r s t a n d i n g h e wa s e n t i t l e d t o r e c e i v e p a yme n tf o r2 5 % o f

h i s u n u s e d s i c k d a y s . He had hea r d, how ever , t hats om e peopl e had r ece i ved paym entfor100% of thei runus ed s i ck day s . A s a r es ul t , H ous t on as ked H ett el , D i r ect orof Per s onnel , on t w o orthr ee o c c a sio n s w h e th e r it w o u ld b e p o ss ib le f o r h im to re c e iv e p a ym e n t f o r 1 0 0 % o f

h is u n u s e d d a y s . H o u s t o n t e s t i f i e d t h a tH e t t e l t o l d h i m h e w a s e n t i t l e d t o o n l y2 5 %.

3 C i cca r el l i , B us i nes s M anage r ; K ar l H ett el , D i r ect orof Per s onnel ; and R ogerW r azi en, D i r ect orof El ement aryE ducat i on. 2 Super i nt endentPi azz a s ubm i t t ed hi s r es i gnat i on l ett eri n t he s pr i ng of 1997, t o be eff ect i ve att he end of

t he s um m er . Pi azz a’ s r es i gnat i on l ett ers peci fi cal l yr eques t ed that h e b e p a id f

o r a ll h is u n u se d sic k d a y s. T h e E a sto n B o a rd o f E d u c a tio n a p p ro v e d h is r eques ti n A pr i l 1997. A ft erPi azz a’ s r et i r ement , B ernadett e M eck r epl ace d hi m as Super i nt endent . H ous t on, C i cca r el l i , H ett el , and W r azi en r emai ned i n t hei rpos i t i ons as p a rt o f S u p e ri n te n d e n t M e c k ’s c a b in e t. H ous t on s ubm i t t ed hi s r es i gnat i on l ett eri n J une 1998, t o be ef fec t i ve the fol l ow i ng m on th. H ou st on ’s l et t er di d n ot r equ estthat he be p ai d fo r al l his un used si ck d ay s. 3 P u r s u a n tt o S c h o o l D i s t r i c tp o l i c y, h e w a s p a i d 2 5 % o f th e v a l u e o f

h i s u n u s e d s i c k d a ys upon r et i r ement , w hi ch amount ed t o a paym entof $32, 919. 04. C i cca r el l i , H ett el , and W r azi en al l r et i r ed w i t hi n a fe w m onths of ea ch otheri n t he s um m erof 1999. A l t hough the g eneral po l i cyw as t o p ayem ploy ees 25% of the value of thei r unused si ck d ay s,C i cca r el l i w as pai d t he ful l amount of hi s s i ck t i m e s oon aft erhi s r et i r ement . T he 4 School D i s t r i ctt her eaf

t eri ni t i at ed l i t i gat i on agai ns tC i cca r el l i s eeki ng r ei m bur s ementfor u n u s e d s ic k -d a yc o m p e n s a tio n p a id to h im in e x c e s s o f 2 5 % o f h is tim e . E as t on A r ea Sc h . D ist. v. C icc a re lli , N o . C -0 0 4 8 -c v -2 0 0 1 -0 0 9 1 4 9 (C t. C .P . N o rt h a m p to n C o u n ty). U p o n re tirem e n t, H e ttel a n d W ra z ien b o th a rra n g e d f o r th e ir sic k -d a yp a ym e n ts to b e p a id in e q u a l in s ta llm e n ts o v e r f o u r ye a rs . T h e yre c e iv e d o n ly th e f ir s t p a ym e n t o f

2 5 % . W r azi en ther eaf

t eri ni t i at ed l i t i gat i on agai ns tthe School D i s t r i ctforthe r emai ni ng p a ym e n ts . S e e W

ra zie n v . E a sto n A re a Sc h . D ist. , 926 A . 2d 585, 586- 88, 590 ( Pa. C om m w . C t . 2007) ( aff i r m i ng j udgm enti n favorof W r azi en and f i ndi ng no err ori n t he tr ial co u rt ’s de cisi o n that the S ch o o l D istri ct w as b o u n d b ythe term s o f W raz ien’s r et i r ementpacka ge negot i at ed byM eck a nd appr oved bythe School B oar d) . H ett el deci ded nott o fi l e s ui tagai ns tt he School D i s t r i ctand has notr ece i ved hi s r emai ni ng p a ym e n ts . 4 Super i nt endentM eck a gr eed t o payC i cca r el l i , H ett el , and W r azi en 100% of thei runus ed si ck d ay s. 4 A ct93, 24 P. S. § 11- 1164, par tof the Penns y l vani a Publ i c School C ode of 1949, r equi r es s chool empl oy er s t o adoptw r i t t en compens at i on pl ans forcert ai n s chool admi ni s tr at or s w hos e pos i t i ons ar e noti ncl uded i n a bar gai ni ng uni t . 24 P. S. § 11- 1164( d) . A ct93 expl i ci t l yexcl udes s uper i nt endent s , bus i nes s m anage r s , and per s onnel d ir e c to rs f

ro m c o v e re d s c h o o l a d m in is tr a to rs . I d. § 1 1 -11 6 4 (a). T h e S ch o o l D istri ct’s A ct93 C om pens at i on Pl an ati s s ue appl i ed t o s chool admi ni s t r at or s bel ow the r ank of superi ntenden tand , con si st ent w i t h the st atute, excluded the p osi t i on s of bu si ness m anage rand di r ect orof per s onnel . T hus , Pi azz a ( as Super i nt endent ) , C i cca r el l i ( as B us i nes s M anage r ) , and H ett el ( as D i r ect orof Per s onnel ) w er e notcover ed bythe A ct93 P la n , w h ile H o u s to n a n d W ra z ie n w e re c o v e re d .A n A ct93 fr i nge bene fi t s charti ntr oduced a ttr i al pr ovi ded thatal l cover ed 5 admi ni s tr at or s w oul d r ece i ve compens at i on for25% of thei runus ed s i ck day s at r et i r ement . T r i al evi dence , how ever , i ndi cat ed thatthi s chartm ayhave be en an out dat ed ver s i on of a w or ks heetSuper i nt endentM eck us ed as a gui de, nota mandat e, t o det erm i ne w hatbenef

i t s w er e pr ovi ded t o empl oy ees , and thatthe cha r tw as notpartof the form al A ct 93 P lan. T h e c h art w as n o t sub m itted to the c o u rtas p art of the S ch o o l D istri ct’s m o tio n in lim in e . T he O r deral s o excl uded evi dence of al l eged “ hi s t or i cal i nequi t i es ” i n compensa t i on 6 (c o n tin u e d ...) 5 T he School D i s t r i ct ’ s A ct93 Pl an pr ovi ded that“[f ] r i nge bene fi t s s hal l be det erm i ned byt he Super i nt endentof School s and/ orthe B oar d of Educat i on. ” A ccor di ng 5 t o H et t el , t he School D i s t r i cthad a pol i cyof tr eat i ng the bus i nes s m anage rand the d ir e c to r o f

p e rs o n n e l th e s a m e a s A c t 9 3 e m p lo y e e s f o r p u rp o s e s o f

f ri n g e b e n e f

its . A ccor di ng t o Super i nt endentM eck, per s onnel di r ect or s and bus i nes s m anage r s coul d be re m u n e ra te d th e s a m e a s A c t 9 3 e m p lo y e e s , b u t th e yd id n o t h a v e to b e tr e a te d th e s a m e . She t es t i fi ed thatthei rbenef i t s w er e l eftt o t he di s cr et i on of the s uper i nt endent , and that s he us ed herdi s cr et i on t o agr ee t o payC i cca r el l i ( notcover ed byA ct93) , H ett el ( not cover ed byA ct93) , and W r azi en ( cover ed byA ct93) 100% of thei rs i ck t i m e at re tir e m e n t. In a n O c to b e r 3 , 2 0 0 5 O rd e r, th e D istric t C o u rt, p e r M a g istra te J u d g e R a p o p o rt, gr ant ed i n partt he School D i s t r i ct ’ s m ot i on i n l i m i ne. T he O r derexcl uded evi dence of the ret i rem ent packag es of P i azza, C i ccarel l i , and H et t el on the b asi s that these i ndi vi dual s w er e nots i m i l ar l ys i tuat ed t o H ous t on beca us e thei rpos i t i ons w er e exc l uded f ro m th e A c t 9 3 P lan . In 2 0 0 8 , the c a se w a s ta k e n o u t o f su sp e n se a n d w a s re a ss ig n e d to 6( . . . cont i nued) 6 an d an all eg ed “se cre t cod e” u sed to req u est p ay m en t fo r si ck ti m e in C icca rell i’ s r et i r ementl ett er . H ous t on does notchal l enge the exc l us i on of the hi s t or i cal i nequi t i es e v id e n c e . H e d o e s c h a llen g e th e e x c lu sio n o f th e se c re t co d e lan g u a g e , w h ich is d is c u s s e d , i nfr a , a t n o te 8 . 6 M agi s tr at e J udge Perki n. B efor e tr i al , H ous t on fi l ed a mot i on forr econs i der at i on of the O rd e r o n th e m o tio n in lim in e , w h ic h M a g is tr a te J u d g e P e rk in d e n ie d o n O c to b e r 8 , 2 0 0 5 . A one- daybench tr i al w as hel d on O ct ober15, 2008. I n a February24, 2009 M e m o ra n d u m O p in io n a n d V e rd ict, th e c o u rt e n ter e d ju d g m e n t f o r th e S c h o o l D istric t. II. H ous t on ar gues t he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s evi dent i arydeci s i ons cons t i tut ed cl earerr or and w e ther efor e s houl d r emand fora new tr i al . H ous t on cont ends evi dence of the re tirem e n t p a c k a g e s o f

th e e x c lu d e d in d iv id u a ls s h o u ld h a v e b e e n a d m itt e d a s re lev a n t to hi s cas e. H e furt hercont ends t he evi dence demonstr at ed thatA ct93 s t atus w as not re lev a n t to th e p a ym e n t o f sic k tim e u p o n re tirem e n t an d th a t th e e x c lu d e d in d iv id u a ls w er e s i m i l ar l ys i tuat ed t o hi m beca us e theys erved i n cabi netpos i t i ons atthe s ame t i m e, had compar abl e y ear s of s ervi ce, and r et i r ed w i t hi n t he s ame t i m e fr ame as hi m . T he School D i s t r i ctcont ends t he D i s t r i ctC our tcorr ect l ydet erm i ned thatW r azi en w as the o n lya p p ro p ria te c o m p a ra to r b e c a u se th e re tirem e n t b e n e f its p ro v id e d u n d e r a sp e c if ic p lan sh o u ld n o t b e c o m p a ra b le, f o r p u rp o se s o f

e sta b lish in g a d isc rim in a tio n c laim , to th o s e p ro v id e d to e m p lo y e e s n o t c o v e re d b yth a t p la n .7

W e r evi ew t he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s deci s i on t o excl ude evi dence on a mot i on i n l i m i ne f o r a b u s e o f

d is c re tio n . S e e B e r n a r d s v i l l e B d . o

f E d u c . v . J

. H. , 4 2 F . 3 d 1 4 9 , 1 6 1 (3d C ir . 1 9 9 4 ). A n a b u se o f

d isc re tio n m a yb e f

o u n d w h e n “ th e d istric t co u rt’s d e c isio n re sts upon a cl ear l yerr oneous fi ndi ng of fa ct , an err antconcl us i on of l aw , oran i m pr oper appl i cat i on of l aw t o fac t . ” I nt ’ lU ni on v. Mack Tr ucks , I

nc. , 8 2 0 F . 2 d 9 1 , 9 5 (3d C ir . 1987) . W e w i l l r ever s e, how ever , onl yi f w e fi nd the D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s err orw as not h a rm le s s . D onl i n v. P hi l i ps Light i ng N

. A m . C or

p. , 5 8 1 F . 3 d 7 3 , 8 0 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 9 ). T o m ake a compar i s on of the pl ai nt i ff’ s tr eatm entt o t hatof an e m pl oy ee out s i de the pl ai nt i ff’ s pr ot ect ed cl as s forpurpos es of a Ti t l e V I I cl ai m , the pl ai nt i ff musts how th a t h e a n d th e e m p lo y e e a re sim ilarlysitu a ted in a ll re lev a n t re s p e c ts . See H ol i f i eld v. R eno , 11 5 F . 3d 15 55 , 15 62 (11t h C i r. 19 97 ) ( coll ect i ng cases) . T he Supr eme C our thas h eld th at ev iden ce o ff

ere d in a d iscri m ination ca se c o n ce rnin g p u rpo rt ed co m p ara tors w ith d if f e re n t s u p e rv is o rs is n e ith e r p e r s e a d m is s ib le n o r p e r s e in a d m is s ib le . See Spr i nt /U ni t ed M gm t . C o. v. Mendel

s ohn , 1 2 8 S . C t. 1 1 4 0 , 1 1 4 3 (2 0 0 8 ). W e ca n gl ean f r o m Mendel

s ohn t hatw hethera fa ct ori s r el evantforpurpos es of a s i m i l ar l ys i tuat ed a n a lysis m u s t b e d e te rm in e d b yth e c o n te x t o f e a c h c a s e . I n di s ci pl i narycas es ori n t he cont extof per s onnel act i ons , forexampl e, the r e l e v a n tf

a c t o r s o f t e n i n c l u d e a “ s h o wi n g th a tth e two e mp l o y e e s d e a l twi t h th e s a me s upervi s or , w er e s ubj ectt o t he s ame st andar ds , and had e ngaged i n s i m i l arconduct w ith o u t su c h d if

f e re n tiatin g o r m iti g a tin g c irc u m sta n c e s a s w o u ld d istin g u ish th e ir8

conductort he empl oy er ’ s t r eatm entof them. ” R adue v. K i m ber l y- C l ark C or

p. , 219 F. 3d 6 1 2 , 6 1 7 -1 8 (7 th C ir. 2 0 0 0 ) (c itatio n o m itt e d ); s ee al s o Johns on v. Kr ogerC o. , 319 F. 3d 858, 867 ( 6t h C i r . 2003) ( “I n t he cont extof per s onnel act i ons , the r el evantfac t or s for determ i ning w hetherem ploy ees ar e si m i l arl ysi tuated often i nclude t he em ploy ees’ s u p e rv is o rs , th e s ta n d a rd s th a t th e e m p lo y e e s h a d to m e e t, a n d th e e m p lo y e e s ’ c o n d u c t.” ( ci t at i on om i t t ed) ) . I n a fa i l ur e t o t r ans ferorpr om ot e ca s e, the r el evantfac t or s m ay i ncl ude s om e of the above , i n addi t i on t o evi dence thatthe empl oy ees “pos s es s ed anal ogous at t r i but es , exper i ence , educa t i on, and qual i fi cat i ons r el evantt o t he pos i t i ons s ought . ” R adue , 219 F. 3d at618. I n a s ever ance orr et i r ementbenef i t s cas e, the r el evant fac t or s m ayi ncl ude the pos i t i ons hel d, pol i ci es orpl ans i n eff ect , the dec i s i onm aker s , and th e tim in g o f

th e s e p a ra tio n s /r e tir e m e n ts . See Mc G u in n e ss v . L in c o ln H a ll , 263 F. 3d 49, 54- 55 ( 2d C i r . 2001) ( pl ai nt i ff e s t abl i s hed s he w as s i m i l ar l ys i tuat ed t o a col l eague w ho re c e iv e d m o re m o n e yin se v e ra n c e w h e re th e tw o e m p lo y e e s “ h e ld p o sitio n s o f ro u g h ly equi val entr ank ( bot h i n t he Execut i ve C abi net ) , . . . w er e fi r ed atr oughl ythe s ame t i m e, [and] the dec i s i ons w i t h r es pectt o the s ever ance w er e both m ade a tthe hi ghes tl evel s of the company ”) . A ddi t i onal fac t or s m ayi ncl ude w hetherthe empl oy ees “r et i r ed under nor m al condi t i ons , ear l y , orpur s uantt o a s ett l ementorot hers peci al ci r cumst ance s . ” Sellars v. C i t

y of G ary , 453 F. 3d 848, 851 n. 1 ( 7th C i r . 2006) . T he pl ai nt i ff i s not r equi r ed t o s how t hathe i s i dent i cal t o t he compar at ori n eac h r el evantfac t or , “buthe m us ts how s ubs t ant i al s i m i l ar i t y . ” R adue , 2 1 9 F .3 d a t 6 1 8 (c ita tio n o m itte d ).9

T he D i s t r i ctC our tcons i der ed onl yA ct93 s t atus i n i t s det erm i nat i on of w hether P iaz z a , C icc a re lli , H e ttel, an d W ra z ien w e re sim ilarlysitu a ted to H o u sto n . T h e c o u rt, how ever , di d notcons i dert he evi dence s how i ng thatA ct93 s t atus w as notdet erm i nat i ve a s to th e a m o u n t o f

s ic k tim e p a id to S c h o o l D is tr ic t e m p lo y e e s u p o n re tir e m e n t. D ependi ng on t he fa ct s and evi dence pr es ent ed, A ct93 s t atus orcover age mayorm aynot be r el evant

— buti n t hi s cas e i ti s notdi s pos i t i ve. B eca us e of the hea vi l yfac t - dr i ven char act erof the i nqui r y , t he mer e pr es ence of a pa r t i cul arcompensa t i on s t atut e orpl an i m pl ement i ng t hats t atut e i s notdet erm i nat i ve of w hetherempl oy ees ar e s i m i l ar l ys i tuat ed fora di s cr i m i nat i on cl ai m . T hi s i s es peci al l ythe ca s e w her e, as her e, ( 1) the A ct93 Pl an pr ovi ded thatfr i nge bene fi t s w er e t o be det erm i ned bythe s uper i nt endentand/ orthe B oar d of Educat i on and di d nots peci fythe per cent age of unus ed s i ck day s thatw oul d be paid upo n ret i rem ent; (2) t he S cho ol D i stri cthad a gen eral po l i cyof p ay i ng al l em ploy ees, r egar dl es s of A ct93 s t atus , 25% of thei runus ed s i ck day s atr et i r ement ; and ( 3) Super i nt endentM eck r et ai ned the di s cr et i on t o payboth A ct93 and non- A ct93 e m p lo y e e s m o re th a n 2 5 % o f th e iru n u s e d s ic k d a y s . W e fi nd t hatundert he fa ct s of thi s cas e, A ct93 s t atus s houl d nothave be en the d isp o sitiv e f

a c to r f o r p u rp o se s o f

d e ter m in in g w h e th e r H o u sto n w a s s im ilarlysitu a ted to otherSchool D i s t r i ctadmi ni s t r at or s . E vi dence of the r et i r ementpacka ges of Pi azz a, C i cca r el l i , and H ett el s houl d nothave be en exc l uded bas ed on the fa ctthatthei rpos i t i ons w er e notcover ed byt he School D i s t r i ct ’ s A ct93 Pl an. B eca us e the D i s t r i ctC our tr el i edW e not e thatH ous t on appea r s t o conce de thatPi azz a, as Super i nt endent , i s notan 7 a p p ro p ria te c o m p a ra to r. In h is R e p lyB rie f , H o u sto n c o n ten d s h e is s im ilarlysitu a ted to all the c ab inet m em b ers (C icca rell i, H ett el, an d W raz ien) b ec au se a ll the c ab inet m em b ers w er e s ubj ectt o t he s ame st andar ds i n empl oym entand theyw er e al l r es pons i bl e for advi s i ng the s uper i nt endent . Pi azz a w as nota ca bi netm ember

— as Super i nt endent , he s u p e rv is e d th e c a b in e t m e m b e rs . 10 s ol el yon A ct93 s t atus , i tabus ed i t s di s cr et i on i n excl udi ng evi dence of the r et i r ement p a c k a g e s o f

th e s e in d iv id u a ls . Fur t herm or e, w e ca nnots aythi s err orw as harm l es s . T he s i m i l ar l ys i tuat ed a n a lysis is f

o r t h e D is tr ic t C o u rt to d e te rm in e in th e f ir s t in s ta n c e . See Mendel s ohn , 128 S . C t. at 1 1 4 6 (“ [ Q ]u e stio n s o f re lev a n c e a n d p re

ju d ice a re f

o r th e D istric t C o u rt to det erm i ne i n t he fi r s ti ns t ance . ” ( ci t i ng U . S. v. A bel , 4 6 9 U .S . 4 5 , 5 4 (1 9 8 4 ))). B u t it appea r s t hatatl eas tC i cca r el l i and H ett el m aybe s i m i l ar l ys i tuat ed t o H ous t on. H ous t on, 7 C i cca r el l i , and H ett el w er e al l l ong- t erm empl oy ees of the School D i s t r i ct , hel d pos i t i ons of r oughl yequi val entr ank ( i n the s uper i nt endent ’ s cabi net ) dur i ng the s ame t i m e per i od, a n d re tired w ith in a y e a r o f e a c h o th e r. M o re o v e r, d e c isio n s re g a rd in g th e f rin g e b e n e f

its ea ch ca b inet m em b er rec eive d u p o n reti rem en t w ere all m ad e b yS u p erinten d en t M ec k . If H ous t on had bee n abl e t o pr es entevi dence thatC i cca r el l i r ece i ved and H ett el w as p ro m ise d 1 0 0 % o f

h is s ick tim e u p o n re tirem e n t, th e b u rd e n o f p ro d u c tio n lik e lyw o u ld have s hi ft ed t o t he School D i s t r i ctt o pr es enta l egi t i m at e, nondi s cr i m i nat oryr eas on for w h ye a c h e m p lo y e e re c e iv e d m o re f a v o ra b le tr e a tm e n t th a n H o u s to n . See Fuent es v. P e rs k ie , 32 F. 3d 759, 763 ( 3d C i r . 1994) . H ous t on, i n turn, w oul d have ha d t heT h e D istric t C o u rt a lso e x c lu d e d e v id e n c e o f a lleg e d “ se c re t co d e ” lan g u a g e u se d in 8 C i cca r el l i ’ s r et i r ementl ett erbeca us e evi dence of hi s r et i r ementw as excl uded as not compar abl e t o H ous t on. I f the courtdet erm i nes on r emand t hatC i cca r el l i i s an appr opr i at e compar at or , hi s r et i r ementl ett ers houl d be admi s s i bl e i n acc or dance w i t h the cour t ’ s rul i ng t hats i m i l arl anguage i n W r azi en’ s r et i r ementl ett erw as admi s s i bl e. 11 oppor tuni tyt o s how t hatt he School D i s t r i ct ’ s s t at ed r eas ons w er e a pr et extfor d is c ri m in a tio n . I

d. E vi dence of addi t i onal s i m i l ar l ys i tuat ed empl oy ees out s i de of H ous t on’ s pr ot ect ed cl as s — eac h of w hom r ece i ved orw as pr om i s ed 100% of hi s s i ck pay u p o n re tirem e n t— lik e lyw o u ld h a v e c h a n g e d th e e n tire c o m p lex io n o f th e trial. A ccor di ngl y , w e w i l l vaca t e the j udgm enti n favorof the School D i s t r i ctand re m a n d f o r a n e w trial. O n re m a n d , the D istric t C o u rt sh o u ld e n g a g e in a f a c tu a l an a ly sis o f th e re lev a n t f

a c to rs to d e ter m in e w h e th e r a n yo f th e e x c lu d e d c o m p a ra to rs is sim ilarly s i tuat ed t o H ous t on. 8 III . I n s um m ary , and fort he r eas ons s etfor t h above, w e w i l l vaca t e the j udgm entof the D i s tr i ctC our tand r emand forfur t herpr ocee di ngs cons i s t entw i t h t hi s opi ni on.