FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT SEPT 3, 2008 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 08- 10815 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 06 -048 16 -C V -S J E F F G R E E R , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s B I R M I N G H A M B E V E R A G E C O M P A N Y , I N C ., D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lle e .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o rth e rn D i s tr i c to f A l ab a ma

_________________________ ( S e p t e m b e r 3, 2008) B efo re T JO F L A T , D U B IN A an d B L A C K , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

A p p el l an tL aw ren ce Jeffrey G reer, an A fri can -A m eri can m al e, ap p eal s, throu gh coun se l , the di stri ctcourt ’ s e ntryof sum m ary j ud gm entfor hi s f orm er em pl oyerB i rm i ng ham B ever age C om pany, Inc. (“ B B C ”) on hi s c l ai m s of r ac i al d is c r im in a tio n b r o u g h t u n d e rT itle V I I o f th e C iv il R ig h ts A c t o f 1 9 6 4 ( “T itle V II ”) and 4 2 U . S . C . §§ 19 81 , 20 00 e- 2(a) . G re erar gu es thatB B C di sc ri m i nat ed a g a in s t h im b y f

a ilin g to p r o m o te h im a n d la te rb yte rm in a tin g h im .

I . FAI LURE TO PR OM OTE G re erar gu es he es t abl i shed a p r im a fa c ie ca se o f d iscr im in atio n fo r B B C ’s fa i l ure t o p rom ot e hi m t o an areasa l es m anager posi t i on . H e argues he w as obj e c t i ve l y qua l i f

i e d f orthe pos i t i on be c aus e of hi s pr e vi ous m a na ge m e nt e xpe r i e nc e , e xt e ns i ve s a l e s e xpe r i e nc e , and he outpe r f orm e d a s ar out e s a l e s pe r s on T om m y B urt on , a C auca si an, w ho m B B C prom ot ed t o the po si t i on . H e argues B B C us e d s ubj e c t i ve c r i t e r i at o f i l l the pos i t i on. G r e e ra l s o a r gue s B B C ’ s r e a s on f o rn o tp r o m o t i n g h i m b e c au s e o f h i s p e r f o rm a n c e p r o b l e m s wa s p r e t e x tu a l . He a r g u e s h is s u p e rv is o r s te s tif ie d th a t h e h a d p e r f

o rm e d w e ll, a n d B B C m o v e d h im to a n ew ro u t e as a p ro m o t i o n an d n o tb ecau se o f p erfo rm an ce p ro b l em s. H e al so a r gue s he ha d f

e w e rpe r f

orm a nc e pr obl e m s tha n B urt on. “W e r e v ie w ad is tr ic t c o u rt’s g r a n t o f s u m m a ryju d g m e n t de no vo , vi e w i ng the re cord and d raw i ng al l i nfer ence s i n favor of the no n-m ov i ng party. ” Fisherv.3

State Mut. I

ns . C o. , 290 F . 3d 1256, 1259- 60 ( 11th C i r . 2002) . S um m a ryj udgm e nt i s pr ope ri f

the pl e a di ngs , de pos i t i ons , a ns w e r s t o i nt e rr oga t or i e s , a nd a dm i s s i ons on fi l e, t og ether w i th the af fi davi t s, i f any, “ show thatthere i s no g enui ne i ss ue as to a n y m a te r ia l f

a c t a n d th a t th e m o v a n t is e n title d to ju d g m e n t a s am a tte ro f la w .” F e d. R . C i v. P . 56( c ) . “ A pa rty m ovi ng f ors um m a ryj udgm e ntha s the bur de n of show i ng thatthere i s no g enui ne i ss ue of fa ct . ” E b erh a rd t v. W a ters , 901 F . 2d 1 5 7 8 , 1 5 8 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 0 ) ( q u o ta tio n o m itte d ) . “A p a rtyo p p o s in g ap r o p e r ly s ubm i tt e d m ot i on f

ors um m a ry j udgm e ntm a ynotr e s tupon m e r e a l l e ga t i ons or d en i al s o f h i s p l ead i n g s, b u tm u stsetfo rth sp eci fi c fact s sh o w i n g th atth ere i s a genu i ne i ss ue for tri al . ” I d. a t1580 ( quot a t i on om i tt e d) . “ A l l e vi de nc e a nd r e a s onabl e f

a c tua l i nf

e r e nc e s the r e f

r om m us tbe vi e w e d a ga i ns tthe pa rtys e e ki ng sum m ary j ud gm ent . ” I

d. (c i t at i on om i tt ed). W he n c ons i de r i ng aT i t l e V I I m ot i on f ors um m a ryj udgm e nti nvol vi ng ci rc um st ant i al evi dence, the di stri ctcourtanal yz es the ca se usi ng the fr am ew ork s e touti n McD on nel l

D ou glas C orp. v. G re en , 4 1 1 U. S. 7 9 2 , 9 3 S. Ct . 1 8 1 7 , 3 6 L. E d. 2d 66 8 (19 73 ). T he McD onne l l D ouglas b u rd en -sh i ft i n g fram ew o rki s al so us e d by c ourt s t o a na l y z e c l a i m s of i ndi r e c te vi de nc e of

r a c i a l e m pl oy m e nt d is c r im in a tio n . H

ol i f i e ld v . R e no , 1 1 5 F .3 d 1 5 5 5 , 1 5 6 4 - 6 6 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 7 ) . U nd er McD onne l l

D ouglas , the pl a i nt i f

f be a r s the i ni t i a l bur de n of4

pres ent i ng suff

i ci entevi dence t o al l ow a r ea sonabl e j ury t o d et erm i ne thathe has sat i sfi ed th e el em en t s o f h i s p r im a fa c ie c a s e . McD onne l l D ouglas , 41 1 U . S . at 80 2, 93 S . C t . at18 24 . If a p r im a fa c ie c a s e i s e s t abl i s he d, the bur de n s hi f t s t o the de f e nda ntt o a rt i c ul a t e al e gi t i m a t e , nondi s c r i m i na t oryr e a s on f orthe e m pl oy m e nt d e c is io n . I

d. at41 1 U . S . at80 2-03 , 93 S . C t . at18 24 . If art i cul at ed, the pl ai nt i ff m u s t s h o w th a t th e d e f

e n d a n t’s r e a s o n w a s p r e te x tu a l. I d. a t804, 93 S . C t . a t1825. T he e m pl oy e r ’ s art i c ul a t e d r e a s on i s l e gi t i m a t e a s l ong a s i ti s hone s t l ya nd r e a s o n ab lyh e ld . E lr od v . Se ars , R oe buc k & C o. , 9 3 9 F .2 d 1 4 6 6 , 1 4 7 0 - 7 1 ( 1 1 th C i r. 19 91 ). T o est abl i sh a p r im a fa c ie c a s e o f f a ilu r e to p r o m o te u n d e rT itle V I I , a p la in tif f m u s t d e m o n s tr a te th a t: “( 1 ) h e . . . b e lo n g e d to ap r o te c te d c la s s ; ( 2 ) h e . . . w a s q u a lif

ie d f o ra n d ap p lie d f

o rap o s itio n th a t th e e m p lo y e rw a s s e e k in g to f ill; ( 3 ) d e s p ite q u a lif

ic a tio n s , h e . . . w a s r e

je c te d ; a n d ( 4 ) th e p o s itio n w a s f ille d w ith an i nd i vi du al ou t si de the prot ec t ed cl as s. ” V e s s e l s v . A t lanta I

nde pe nde nt Sc hool System , 40 8 F . 3d 76 3, 76 8 (11 th C i r. 20 05 ) ( ci t at i on om i tt ed). W hen the em pl oyer doe s doe s notf

orm a l l y a nnounc e the pos i t i on, “ apl a i nt i f f ne e d nots how unde rthe s e c o n d p r o n g th a th e ap p l i e d f o rth e p o s i t i o n - o n l yth a tth e e mp l o y e rh a d s o me re as on t o con si der hi m for the po st . ” I d. T o sho w he w as qu al i fi ed, a pl ai nt i ff need on l y s ho w thathe “ sa t i sf i ed an em pl oyer ’ s obj ec t i ve qu al i fi ca t i on s. ” I d. a t769.5

S u b je c tiv e q u a lif

ic a tio n s a r e e v a lu a te d a t th e p r e te x t s ta g e o f th e in q u iry . I

d. W hen a na l y z i ng pr e t e xt , w e w i l l nots e c ond- gue s s a n e m pl oy e r ’ s “ hone s ta s s e s s m e nt ” of ap e r s o n ’s q u a lif

ic a tio n s . C oope rv . Southe rn C o. , 39 0 F . 3d 69 5, 73 0 (11 th C i r. 2004) . A c l a i m unde r42 U . S . C . § 1981 r e qui r e s i nt e nt i ona l r a c e di s c r i m i na t i on, and the t es ti s “ the sa m e a s the form ul at i on used i n T i t l e V II di sc ri m i nat ory tre atm entca se s. ” B row n v. A m er i can Hon da Motor C o. , Inc. , 939 F . 2d 946, 949 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 1 ) ( c ita tio n o m itte d ) . “[ S ]u m m a ryju d g m e n t a g a in s t th e p la in tif f is approp ri at e i f he f

ai l s t o sat i sf

y any on e of the el em ent s of a p r im a fa c ie c a s e .” T ur l i ngton v . A t lanta G as L i ght C o. , 1 3 5 F. 3 d 1 4 2 8 , 1 4 3 3 ( 1 1 th Ci r . 1 9 9 8 ) ( AD EA cont ext ). If a pl ai nt i ff

m akes a p r im a fa c ie s how i ng of di s c r i m i na t i on, a nd the e m pl oy e rof

f e r s al e gi t i m a t e , nondi s c r i m i na t oryr e a s on f orthe e m pl oy m e nta c t i on, the pl ai nt i ff

m ustcom e f

orw ar d w i th evi dence s uffi ci entt o p erm i ta r ea sonabl e f ac t f in d e rto c o n c lu d e th a t th e r e a s o n s g iv e n b yth e e m p lo y e rw e r e p r e te x tu a l. H o lifie ld , 115 F . 3d a t1565. T o s how pr e t e xt , the pl a i nt i f f m us tpr e s e nts uf

f i c i e nt e vi de nc e “ t o pe rm i tar e a s onabl e f a c t f i nde rt o c onc l ude tha tthe r e a s ons gi ve n by th e e m p lo y e rw e r e n o t th e r e a l r e a s o n s f o rth e a d v e r s e e m p lo y m e n t d e c is io n .” C om bs v . P lantat i on P at te rns , 10 6 F . 3d 15 19 , 15 28 (11th C i r. 19 97 ). C on cl usory a lle g a tio n s , w ith o u t m o r e , a r e in s u f f ic ie n t to s h o w p r e te x t. M ay f i e ld v . P at te rs on6

P um p C o. , 101 F . 3d 1371, 1376 ( 11th C i r . 1996) ( quot a t i on om i tt e d) . I ns t e a d, the pl ai nt i ff m ustm ee tthe proffer ed re as on “ head on and rebuti t . ” Ch a p ma n v . AI T ra n sp o rt , 22 9 F . 3d 10 12 , 10 30 (11th C i r. 20 00 ) ( e n banc ) . “ A m e r e s c i nt i l l aof e vi de nc e i n s upportof

the nonm ovi ng pa rtyw i l l nots uf f i c e t o ove r c om e am ot i on for s um m ary j ud gm ent . ” Y oung v . C i t

yof P alm B ay, Fla. , 3 5 8 F .3 d 8 5 9 , 8 6 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) . W e c on cl ud e f

rom ou r r evi ew of the re cord thatthe di stri ctcourtdi d n oterr i n gr a nt i ng s um m a ry j udgm e ntf orthe f a i l ur e t o pr om ot e , a s G r e e rw a s not qu al i fi ed for the po si t i on and, there fore , fa i l ed t o est abl i sh a p r im a fa c ie ca se . A l tho ug h G re ernever appl i ed for the ar easa l es m anager posi t i on , he di d n otneed t o appl y , a s B B C c ons i de r e d e ve ry one f orthe pos i t i on. T he obj e c t i ve qua l i f i c a t i ons f orthe pos i t i on w e r e pr e vi ous gr oc e rys t or e e xpe r i e nc e , pr e vi ous l e a de r s hi p a nd m anagem entski l l s, and d et ai l ed att ent i on t o the em pl oyee ’ s c urre ntpo si t i on . G re er l ack ed th e req u i si t e d et ai l ed att en t i o n , as sh o w n b y h i s n u m ero u s p ro b l em s as a rout e s al es pers on , hi s onl y m anagem entexperi ence i nv ol ved fou r peopl e t en ye ar s before the po si t i on beca m e open, and h e had no groceryst ore e xp er i ence . M or e ove r , the pe r s on a c tua l l y pr om ot e d ha d e xt e ns i ve gr oc e rym a na ge m e nt experi ence , and G re erdi d n otshow thatB B C ’ s r ea son for prom ot i ng the other p e r s o n b a s e d o n h is p r io re x p e r ie n c e w a s p r e te x tu a l.7 I I . T E R MI NA T I ON G re erar gu es he es t abl i shed a p r im a fa c ie c a s e o f r a c e d is c r im in a tio n in h is te rm in a tio n c la im . H e a r g u e s th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e rr o n e o u s lyr e a d th e “s im ila r ly s itu a te d ” r e q u ir e m e n t f

o rc o m p a r a to r s to o n a rr o w lyb yr e q u ir in g id e n tic a l c o n d u c t. G reer arg u es th e co u rtsh o u l d h av e l o o k ed t o th e n atu re o f th e co n d u ct , as th e t est r e q u ir e s o n lys im ila rc o n d u c t. H e a r g u e s th e c o rr e c t c o m p a r is o n w o u ld b e w ith em pl oyee s w ho had repeat ed i nci dences of i nsub ordi nat i on and w ho se i ss ues r ai se d s e r i o u s q u e s t i o n s ab o u tth e t i m e a n d a tt e n t i o n th e ywe r e d e v o t i n g t o th e j o b . He i dent i fi es B J S m i th, R oss H ou sh, and T om m y B urt on , as com para t ors. H e argues th e s e Cau c a s i a n e mp l o y e e s h a d b e h a v i o ra tl e a s ta s b a d a s h i s b e h a v i o r , y e tBBC d id n o t f ir e th e m . G r e e ra ls o a r g u e s th a t B B C ’s a rtic u la te d r e a s o n f o rf ir in g h im w a s p r e te x tu a l. H e a r g u e s B B C tr e a te d th e C au c a s ian c o m p a r a to r s m o r e f a v o r ab ly f o rid e n tic a l o rw o r s e c o n d u c t, a n d th e e v id e n c e s h o w e d G r e e rw a s s a tis f a c to r ily p erfo rm i n g h i s du t i es. T h e s ta n d a r d s s e t f

o rth ab o v e ap p lyto th is c la im a s w e ll. I n a d d itio n , i n c a s e s i nvol vi ng a l l e ge d r a c i a l bi a s i n the appl i c a t i on of di s c i pl i ne f

or vi ol a t i on of

w ork rul e s , the pl a i nt i f f . . . m us ts how e i the r( a ) tha the di d not vi ol a t e the w ork rul e , or( b) tha the e nga ge d i n m i s c onduc ts i m i l a rt o tha tof a per son o ut si de the prot ec t ed cl as s, and thatthe di sc i pl i narym ea sure s enforce d agai nsthi m w er e m ore s ever e than tho se enforce d agai nstthe other p e r s o n s w h o e n g a g e d in s im ila rm is c o n d u c t. J one s v . G e rw e ns , 874 F . 2d 1534, 1540 ( 11th C i r . 1989) . T he pl a i nt i f f a nd the8

c o m p a r a to r s m u s t b e “s im ila r lys itu a te d in a ll r e le v a n t r e s p e c ts . . . . [ a n d ] it is ne c e s s a ry t o c ons i de rw he the rthe e m pl oy e e s a r e i nvol ve d i n ora c c us e d of the sam e or s i m i l arcond uctand are di sc i pl i ned i n d i ff er entw ay s. ” H

o lifie ld , 115 F . 3d a t1562. “ [ T ] he qua nt i ty a nd qua l i tyof the c om pa r a t or ’ s m i s c onduc t[ m us t ] be n e a r lyid e n tic a l to p r e v e n t c o u rts f r o m s e c o n d - g u e s s in g e m p lo y e r s ’ r e a s o n ab le deci si on s. ” M

a n i c c i a v . Br o wn , 1 7 1 F .3 d 1 3 6 4 , 1 3 6 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 9 ) ; se e B urke - Fow le rv . O r ange C ount y, Fla. , 447 F . 3d 1319, 1323 n. 2 ( 11th C i r . 2006) ( r e s ol vi ng i ntr a - c i r c ui ts pl i t ) . A n “ e m pl oy e rm a yf i r e a n e m pl oy e e f

oragood re as on , a bad rea son, a r ea son b as ed on erroneou s f ac t s, or for no reas on atal l , as l on g as i t s a ct i on i s notfor adi sc ri m i nat ory r ea son. ” N ix v . W L C Y R a d io /R a h a ll C om m uni c at i ons , 7 3 8 F .2 d 1 1 8 1 , 1 1 8 7 ( 1 1 th C ir .1 9 8 4 ) . A f te rr e v ie w in g th e r e c o r d , w e c o n c lu d e th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d id n o t e rrin g r a n tin g s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t o n th e te rm in a tio n c la im b e c au s e G r e e rf a ile d to i de nt i f y s uf f i c i e nt l y s i m i l a rc om pa r a t or s ors how B B C ’ s r e a s on f ort e rm i na t i on w a s pr e t e xtua l . B B C di s c i pl i ne d G r e e r ’ s c om pa r a t or s onl yonc e , i f a ta l l , f or e xc e e di ng the i ra l l ott e d c e l l phone m i nut e s , a nd the r e w a s no e vi de nc e i n the r e c o r d s h o w in g b y h o w m u c h h is c o m p a r a to r s e x c e e d e d th e lim it. U n lik e h is com para t ors, B B C di sc i pl i ned G re eratl ea sttw i ce for e xces si ve ce l l ph on e use , an d , i n th e m o n th b efo re h i s t erm i n at i o n , G reer accru ed 3 , 7 8 5 cel l u l ar m i n u t es.9

W h e th e rB B C d e c id e d to te rm in a te h im f o rth is in s u b o r d in a tio n o rb e c au s e it be l i e ve d, e ve n i f

e rr one ous l y , tha the c oul d notpe r f orm hi s dut i e s gi ve n the a m ountof

t i m e s pe nton the c e l l phone , B B C ’ s de c i s i on w a s notm ot i va t e d by d is c r im in a tio n . F or the abov e- st at ed re as on s, w e a ff i rm the di stri ctcourt ’ s grantof sum m ary ju d g m e n t. AF F I RME D.